Feed aggregator

Are Australia's coal and gas generators able to power Australia through next summer's heatwaves? The evidence of last summer suggests they cannot be relied upon, with a new report showing how coal plants melted in the Queensland heat on a day of record demand.

Kangaroo Island loses first-of-kind protest against network decision, but regulator flags changes to favour decentralised options.

Thirty-two of the world’s largest wind turbines are up and generating power in new offshore wind project off the UK coast.

Push to unlock more of Australia’s unconventional gas resources and build massive pipelines has been labelled a “false solution” to a non-existent problem.

The packaging for Pringles and Lucozade Sport is among the most difficult to recycle, a trade body says.

Queensland premier will neither confirm nor deny deal under which full royalties due would only be paid in later years

The Queensland government has reportedly offered Adani a royalties pause worth up to $320m as the company decides whether to proceed with its Carmichael mine project.

The deal, in which Adani would pay a discounted $2m a year on exported coal in the mine’s early years, could be signed this week and has concerned some senior Labor figures, the ABC has reported.

Continue reading...

Almost 2,000 plants new to science have been identified in the past year, but many are at risk.

SolarCity’s co-founder and former CEO Lyndon Rive is leaving the company that he helped start to his cousin Elon Musk.

Work on regional plans for 100 per cent renewable energy highlight importance of storage to soak up daytime supply, and the need to reduce night-time loads and shift them to the day.

Those who advocate for the status quo because of the inertia provided by synchronous generators should be aware that these technologies are far from perfect.

Battery storage is set to jump-start the clean energy transition while at the same time disrupting the traditional utility business model.

Many people believe free-range eggs are tastier and more 'natural'. Andres Stapff/Reuters

Many shoppers buy free-range eggs because they think the eggs are superior, rather than out of explicit concern for the hens’ welfare, according to our new research.

We asked 75 people in focus groups and shopping mall interviews about what food choices they make and why. When we asked shoppers what they look for in terms of products that promote animal welfare, the most common answers involved free-range or cage-free eggs.

We then asked people why they chose these products. A strong theme emerged: many shoppers preferred these types of eggs because they viewed them as higher quality, having better taste and colour, more nutritious, and safer than eggs produced using other methods such as barn systems.

Our participants attributed these features to the idea that free-range (and cage-free) egg production was “more natural”, and in particular that hens had access to a “natural diet”. This type of diet in turn led to what they described as more nutritious and safer products.

Regardless of whether these claims are true or not, our survey results are consistent with other research suggesting that food labelled with humane production methods prompts people to imbue it with certain characteristics, such as better taste and higher nutritional value.

Responsible shopping

To put it in philosophical terms, ethical consumption is about considering “moral others” when we make purchases. In other words, ethical shopping involves thinking about what is best for our communities, the environment and non-human animals.

In contrast, when we act solely as consumers we tend to focus on our own needs and preferences, or those of our family and others close to us. Increasingly we are being encouraged to consider moral others when we buy food, and free-range eggs and meat are key examples of this trend.

Of course, our participants may well care about the welfare of chickens (and other animals). But, when justifying their choices, our research showed ideas of better welfare and better product quality are strongly linked, and often it is the latter that seals the deal.

Our research also implies that consumers think about animal welfare in much broader terms than suggested by the so-called “five freedoms” used by scientists to define animal welfare.

Our other important finding was that people who bought free-range eggs did not tend to make meat purchases based on similar welfare claims. One reason given was that free-range eggs are seen as relatively affordable, whereas free-range meat was viewed as too expensive.

Note, however, that some researchers argue that many free-range eggs available in Australia (particularly the cheaper ones) don’t necessarily resolve concerns about animal welfare and health or other ethical issues, as they are produced using large-scale production and distribution systems.

We also found that participants considered the labelling on eggs to be much clearer than on other types of food products that incorporate welfare claims, despite ongoing debates in Australia about labelling standards, including what should count as “free range”.

Several people in our study also indicated that they kept their own hens, or sourced eggs from people who did, to ensure that they were eating only “free-range” products.

Overall, our research highlights the complexities of ethical consumption and the trade-offs that people make between a range of factors, including taste and price. This suggests that common assumptions about why people buy free-range eggs may be too simplistic.

A shared understanding of what “good” farm animal welfare means and why it matters is an essential starting point for a much broader conversation. We need to debate how we can sustainably and humanely produce affordable, safe and nutritious food.

Consumer demand alone doesn’t tell us how people define “good food” or “good eggs”.

Rachel A. Ankeny receives funding from the Australian Research Council including DP110105062 "What Shall We Have For Tea? Toward a New Discourse of Food Ethics in Contemporary Australia" which funded the research discussed, and LP130100419 on animal welfare which includes contributions from industry partners Coles Group Ltd, Elders Limited, Richard Gunner’s Fine Meats Pty Ltd, and the South Australian Research and Development Institute. The University of Adelaide is a partner in the Animal Welfare Science Centre.

This research was funded by the Australian Research Council (DP110105062 What Shall We Have For Tea? Toward a New Discourse of Food Ethics in Contemporary Australia). Heather Bray's salary is partly funded (50%) by an Australian Research Council Linkage Project (LP130100419) which includes contributions from industry partners Coles Group Ltd, Elders Limited, Richard Gunner’s Fine Meats Pty Ltd, and the South Australian Research and Development Institute. She received scholarships from the Pig Research and Development Corporation (now Australian Pork Limited) between 1991 and 1997. The University of Adelaide is a partner in the Animal Welfare Science Centre.

Much of the packaging we put in the recycling bin ends up in landfills, but a design competition backed by Prince Charles is aiming to tackle the issue.

Offshore oil and gas regulator says there was a 10,500-litre spill in April 2016 but refuses to reveal where it occurred or company responsible

An offshore oil and gas well in Australia leaked oil continuously into the ocean for two months in 2016, releasing an estimated 10,500 litres. But the spill was never made public by the regulator and details about the well, its whereabouts and operator remain secret.

In its annual offshore performance report released this week, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority included a mention of a 10,500-litre spill in April 2016. It provided limited details about, noting that it had been identified during a routine inspection.

Continue reading...

Have you ever stopped to think about how many mussel shells are ending up in landfill? Something to think about when you next feast on a steaming hot bowl of mussels.

"One boy said: I'm going to kiss it in the mouth," the snake's owner said.

The countries most vulnerable to climate change say the rapid implementation of the accord is key to their survival.

Whether you’re a fashion junkie or a reluctant shopper, there is no denying that buying online is hugely convenient – a couple of clicks and your order is on its way to your door. But we are all aware that these goods need to be transported, and that a delivery involving planes, ships and trucks will produce greenhouse gases and therefore add to climate change.

Wouldn’t it be nice to know that your online shopping does not contribute to global warming? Are carbon-neutral deliveries possible? What are logistics companies doing to reduce their environmental impact?

With online shopping hitting new heights, transport companies have expanded their airfreight capacity and overall freight volumes grew by 3.8% in 2016.

More packages for customers might be good for the companies’ bottom line, but it is rather bad for the environment. In response, most major logistics companies have implemented carbon-reduction strategies. These companies not only regard carbon reduction as a way to gain their customers’ trust by appealing to their environmental conscience, but also as an opportunity to save costs by improving energy efficiency - which also cuts carbon emissions.

Current energy efficiency initiatives include an increase in the use of electric vehicles and bikes to cover the “last mile” – the final leg of the parcel’s journey from depot to doorstep. Another strategy is the introduction of better logistics software that helps companies to plan routes and track drivers’ movement, delivering more goods in fewer vehicles.

Companies are also increasingly looking for “intermodal solutions” - instead of using only trucks for delivery, they might incorporate other transport modes such as rail or ships at various points in the journey, depending on what will use the least fuel energy.

Going zero-carbon?

These initiatives are a step in the right direction, but some companies say they plan to get rid of carbon emissions altogether.

One of the biggest challenges is the reduction of emissions from planes. Air freight – and aviation overall – is a massive contributor to total world greenhouse emissions.

Some transport companies are working with entrepreneurs to replace jet fuel with non-fossil alternatives, such as biofuels from algae. Algae grows naturally all over the world, can be rapidly cultured, and can be grown on land that is not suitable for conventional farming, thus largely avoiding competition with agriculture.

Algae is currently seen as a fuel for the future, rather than a viable option today. Producing algal biofuel on the necessary scale for commercial aviation is currently too expensive, but studies suggest that widespread replacement of kerosene with biofuels could ultimately reduce carbon emissions by up to 65%.

Droning on

Drones to deliver goods will also be the new normal in the future, and some companies, such as USP, are already running trials.

While it doesn’t make much sense to have a fleet of drones operating from a warehouse in the middle of nowhere, putting them a van and using them to cover the “last mile” is potentially very efficient. It saves the driver the trouble of parking the truck, getting out, finding the package, and carrying it to the door in person.

More improvements are also planned for trucks and electric vehicles. Although trucks make up fewer than 5% of vehicles in many industrialised countries, they produce 25% of greenhouse emissions in the European Union and 20% in Australia. Through new carbon emissions standards, trucks could slash their emissions by up to 40% by 2030.

But rather than replace old vans with newer versions of the same model, the really smart thing to do would be to go electric – particularly if those vehicles can be charged with renewable electricity. As parcel delivery vans typically only drive around 100km per day, they do not suffer the “range anxiety” of long-haul trucks, potentially making electric vans a viable option.

Logistics firm DHL last year unveiled its own electric delivery van, and last month announced plans to double its production.

Make it yourself

3D printing can also bring us closer to the goal of carbon neutrality, simply because it cuts out the need for delivery altogether, in favour of manufacturing your purchases yourself, at home.

Although 3D printing still faces sustainability challenges, it can be regarded as a disruptive technology that may lead to a great shift in supply chains, as most goods will be produced and sold close to their point of consumption. One estimate forecasts that 3D printing can potentially reduce global supply chains costs by 50-90%, consequently leading to large carbon savings.

Although these steps might not be enough to offer a 100% carbon-neutral delivery, the combination of these initiatives and their roll-out in the coming years has the potential to make ordering goods online significantly greener.

The future of transport looks bright – and transport companies will play their part to give you a clear conscience when you order online. Happy shopping!

David M. Herold ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son poste universitaire.

WHO figures show people in Britain are more likely to die from dirty air than those living in some other comparable countries

People in the UK are 64 times as likely to die of air pollution as those in Sweden and twice as likely as those in the US, figures from the World Health Organisation reveal.

Britain, which has a mortality rate for air pollution of 25.7 for every 100,000 people, was also beaten by Brazil and Mexico – and it trailed far behind Sweden, the cleanest nation in the EU, with a rate of 0.4.

Continue reading...

I know there are much bigger and more terrible things in the world, but these tiny creatures have come to represent a sense of doom and decay

Here they are again, always in my peripheral vision, the tiny papery things that make me feel neither strong nor stable. Indeed, I would probably vote for anyone who vowed to get rid of the clothes moths that I always think have gone, until they come fluttering back. Everything may feel manageable but they are here to undermine that – by the time you see them, the damage is done. They serve only to remind you of that, for moths don’t eat anything at all – the larvae do. Once you see them, you have lost and they have won.

They acquire all the nutrition they will ever need as caterpillars. They live on nothing. Their mouth parts have atrophied, their only goal is to reproduce. Every year I think I have stopped their life cycle, that I am in control – and every year it turns out that I haven’t. They are eating their way through clothes that are loved and unloved. The world appears infested and the world is warming, so they appear more and more.

Continue reading...