Feed aggregator

Paula Kahumbu: The sale of rhino horn in South Africa won’t help save rhinos, but it will benefit organised crime

South Africa has just launched the first ever legal rhino horn auction. If you are based in South Africa and would like to buy some rhino horn you can place your bid here.

This is not a government auction, although it is sanctioned by the South African government. It has been organised by private rhino rancher, John Hume, who took the government to court and won the right to sell 265 rhino horns weighing about 500 kg. Trade in rhino horn is illegal in most countries, but the black market value of one kilogram is said to be USD 100,000—more than the price of platinum.

Continue reading...

West Knoyle, Wiltshire It skitters up the fabric to the pinnacle, dropping down several feet then looping back up again, and again, and again

Taking respite from the hubbub of milling outdoor and bushcraft enthusiasts attending the Wilderness Gathering, I lie back under the shade of a conical bell tent. Gazing upwards into the canvas peak I watch a wasp skittering up the ivory fabric to the pinnacle, dropping down several feet then looping back up again, and again, and again.

Related: Conservationists slam 'hateful' survey promoting wasp killing

Continue reading...

Solar panels are still a rarity in WA's lower-income areas. Orderinchaos/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

Many Western Australian householders are living in “energy poverty”, according to our new Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre research report, Power to the People: WA’s Energy Future.

Although average household spending on electricity, gas and heating is no more than 4% of income, the figure rises considerably for those on lower incomes. In particular, more than a quarter of single-parent families say they spend more than 10% of their income on energy.

Single parents in particular are far more exposed to energy poverty, a trend that has grown over the past 10 years. Around one in ten of these households spends at least 15% of their income on energy costs. In some cases, this forces them to compromise on other essentials such as food and health care.

Read more: Five things the east coast can learn from WA about energy

Rising energy costs, as well as a personal commitment to reducing greenhouse gases, are motivating many WA households to vote with their feet (or wallets) and adopt rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) panels at a dramatic rate.

In WA, the installed capacity of rooftop solar PV has grown by 37% in the past 18 months alone. Around 25% of suitable dwellings are now fitted with solar panels. This takes WA to third place among Australian states, behind Queensland (32%) and South Australia (31%).

If this trend continues, the state’s rooftop solar PV capacity is predicted to exceed 2,000 megawatts by 2022. That’s larger than all but one of WA’s power stations.

Generating capacity from WA rooftop solar, 2016 to 2022 Projections are based on predictions from a log linear regression of total MW of rooftop solar PV capacity, and reflect the growth both in the number of installations and the average MW output per solar PV installation. Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre/Clean Energy Regulator

Similar trends are predicted at a national level, with consumer-bought rooftop solar PV expected to account for around 24% of electricity generation by 2040. This is set to make Australia one of the most decentralised electricity networks in the world, with 45% of its total generating capacity coming from “behind the meter”.

Haves and have-nots

Rooftop solar is a popular option, but not all households are able to take advantage of this technology. Our report reveals a clear socioeconomic gradient in household solar installations in WA.

Panels are fitted to only 7.4% of suitable homes in areas in the lowest 10% on socioeconomic indicators. That figure rises to 16% in the next-lowest 10%, and the gap widens still further as income rises. Solar installation rates are around 30% in mid-to-high socioeconomic areas.

Share of suitable WA homes with solar panels, by level of socioeconomic disadvantage Homes deemed suitable for solar PV include detached, semi-detached or terraced houses, but not strata-titled apartments or units. Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre/Clean Energy Regulator/ABS

Better incentives could boost these numbers, especially in poorer areas. The initial upfront costs deter many homeowners, while most landlords have little financial motivation to install solar on rental properties.

Read more: Poor households are locked out of green energy, unless governments help

Accessible, secure and affordable energy is essential to any well-functioning economy. And many citizens, communities and governments are acting on the imperative to move to a greener source.

Despite its huge amounts of wind and sunshine, WA lags behind other states both in committing to a clear renewable energy target and in its investment in large-scale renewable power projects.

Renewable projects under construction or at commissioning stage in 2017 Projects at the commissioning phase at the end of 2016 are not included in the total new capacity figure. Investment in the South Australia Hornsdale Wind Farm includes stages 1, 2 and 3. Data for ACT and NT not available; ACT is expected to draw most of its renewable energy from other states and territories. Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre/Clean Energy Council Australia/various other sources

According to our report, WA’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 2015 were 86.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent – fourth-ranked behind Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. This means WA contributed 16.1% of Australia’s national emissions that year.

But while other states and territories have adopted proactive emissions-reduction policies such as state-based renewable energy targets, WA has not yet taken substantial action on this front.

Read more: The solar panel and battery revolution: how will your state measure up?

Here’s the likely game-changer: efficient, cost-effective battery storage that can deliver power at the scale required. Storage is set to become vital, both for smoothing out domestic power consumption from solar panels and for large-scale electricity generation. The Finkel Review has recommended that all future renewable energy projects be required to produce “dispatchable” power – that is, be able to store their power and release it at times of higher demand.

Greater efficiency in balancing energy demand over the course of the day, and across large-scale grid systems that feature a range of different weather conditions, is also likely to help overcome the intermittency problems associated with renewable sources.

Australia is on the cusp of an energy revolution, and the pace of change is only going to increase. WA, like every state, needs a clear roadmap to navigate the journey effectively, one that integrates existing and emerging energy technologies and maintains protections for families who cannot currently afford solar panels.

This will give greater certainty to the energy future we can all expect – and, critically, ensure that no one is left behind.

Rebecca Cassells is a Principal Research Fellow with the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre. The Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre is an independent economic and social research organisation located within Curtin Business School at Curtin University. The Centre was established in 2012 with support from Bankwest (a division of Commonwealth Bank of Australia) and Curtin University. The views in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the views of Curtin University and/or Bankwest or any of their affiliates.

Alan Duncan is Director of the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre. The Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre is an independent economic and social research organisation located within Curtin Business School at Curtin University. The Centre was established in 2012 with support from Bankwest (a division of Commonwealth Bank of Australia) and Curtin University. The views in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the views of Curtin University and/or Bankwest or any of their affiliates.

Yashar Tarverdi is a Research Fellow at the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre. The Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre is an independent economic and social research organisation located within Curtin Business School at Curtin University. The Centre was established in 2012 with support from Bankwest (a division of Commonwealth Bank of Australia) and Curtin University. The views in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the views of Curtin University and/or Bankwest or any of their affiliates.

For the first time the smart energy sector will have a truly national training strategy.

New study on technology generation costs shows wind and solar remain cheapest, with further cost falls ahead.

China's unexpected 2017 boom in solar PV installation could have an unfortunate impact on the ambitious plans of many in Australia's surging solar sector – a bottleneck in module supplies and price rises that could impact the huge pipeline of project.

Australian Vanadium says VSUN subsidiary well advanced in negotiations to roll out residential vanadium redox flow battery.

The consultation period for the Draft Reef 2050 Water Quality Improvement Plan 2017-2022 is open from the 28th August - 10 October 2017.

Owners of Vale Point coal generator looking to build 45MW solar farm on landfill site of now closed coal units.

Buried in his grid study is how electric cars and smart control systems will enable deep penetration of solar and wind energy

A new study published in the journal Environmental Research Letters marks an important advance in the examination of fossil fuel companies’ responsibility for climate change.

When the perfect is the enemy of the "roughly acceptable”: Economists back emissions policy that Alan Finkel has put on the table.

Welcome to the brave new world of plentiful, variable, zero marginal cost renewable energy, By all indications – we ain’t seen nothing yet

Application for assessment under the EPBC Act – call for public comments open 29 August 2017 until 29 September 2017.

Since UK announced plans to ban petrol and diesel sales from 2040, the shift to electric cars has attracted a lot of negative media coverage.

Initiative to convert CO2 into solid carbonates aims to produce building materials on commercial scale by 2020

An Australian pilot project capturing carbon emissions and storing them in building materials aims to have a full-scale production plant by 2020.

Mineral Carbonation International, an Australian company developing carbon-utilisation technology will officially launch its technology and research program at the Newcastle Institute for Energy and Resources on Friday.

Continue reading...

NERA is working with Australian CleanTech to find the country’s best demonstration projects on clean technology solutions that integrate with and improve efficiency and competitiveness for the energy resources sector.

With some of the recent issues within recycling exposed, people may be asking themselves whether they're still making a difference.

As interior secretary recommends boundary changes to Donald Trump, three national monuments are reportedly at risk of being reduced in size

In April, Donald Trump ordered a sweeping review of 27 national monuments, from Maine to Oregon. The monuments were set aside over the last three decades by Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama. Trump’s review sought to explore whether the protected land should be opened up to create economic opportunities for industries such as oil, gas, mining and timber.

Related: US public lands: Trump official recommends shrinking national monuments

Continue reading...

Few topics have attracted as much political attention in Australia over the past decade as emissions reduction policy.

Amid mounting concern over electricity price increases across Australia and coinciding with blackouts in South Australia and near-misses in New South Wales, the Australian government asked Chief Scientist Alan Finkel to provide a blueprint for reform of the electricity industry, in a context in which emissions reduction policy was an underlying drumbeat.

In a new poll of the ESA Monash Forum of leading economists, a majority said that Finkel’s suggested Clean Energy Target was not necessarily a better option than previously suggested policies such as an emissions trading scheme. But many added that doing nothing would be worse still.

Read more: The Finkel Review: finally, a sensible and solid footing for the electricity sector.

The Finkel Review’s terms of reference explicitly precluded it from advising on economy-wide emissions reduction policy, and implicitly required it also to reject emission reduction policies such as an emissions tax or cap and trade scheme.

One of the Finkel Review’s major recommendations was a Clean Energy Target (CET). This is effectively an extension of the existing Renewable Energy Target to cover power generation which has a greenhouse gas emissions intensity below a defined hurdle. Such generation can sell certificates which electricity retailers (and directly connected large customers) will be required to buy.

The ESA Monash Forum panel was asked to consider whether this approach was “preferable” to an emission tax or cap and trade scheme. As usual, responses could range from strong disagreement to strong agreement with an option to neither agree nor disagree. Twenty-five members of the 53-member panel voted, and most added commentary to their response – you can see a summary of their verdicts below, and their detailed comments at the end of this article.

A headline result from the survey is that a large majority of the panel does not think the CET is preferable to a tax or cap and trade scheme. None strongly agreed that the CET was preferable, whereas 16 either disagreed or strongly disagreed, and four agreed.

Of the four who agreed, three provided commentary to their response. Stephen King preferred the CET on the grounds of its ease of implementation but otherwise would have preferred a tax or cap and trade scheme. Michael Knox agreed on the basis that the CET was preferable to the existing Renewable Energy Target. Harry Bloch unconditionally endorsed the CET.

Of the five who neither agreed nor disagreed, three commented and two of them (Paul Frijters and John Quiggin) said there was not much to distinguish a CET from a tax or cap and trade scheme. Warwick McKibbin, who disagreed with the proposition, nonetheless also suggested that the CET, tax and cap and trade scheme were comparably effective if applied only to the electricity sector.

However, closer examination of the comments suggests much greater sympathy with Finkel’s CET recommendation than the bare numbers indicate. Even for those who strongly disagreed that the CET was preferable, none suggested that proceeding with a CET would be worse than doing nothing. But eight (Stephen King, Harry Bloch, Alison Booth, Saul Eslake, Julie Toth, Flavio Menezes, Margaret Nowak and John Quiggin) commented that proceeding with the CET would be better than doing nothing. Interestingly none of these eight explained why they thought doing something was better than doing nothing. Does it reflect a desire for greater investment certainty or a conviction that reducing emissions from electricity production in Australia is important?

Seven respondents (Stephen King, Alison Booth, Saul Eslake, Julie Toth, Gigi Foster, Lin Crase and John Quiggin) alluded to the political constraints affecting the choice, of which several drew attention to Finkel’s own observations. None of these seven suggested that the political constraint invalidated proceeding with the CET.

Of the 19 economists who provided comments on their response, 16 thought a tax or cap and trade scheme better than a CET. Numbers were equally drawn (three each) as to whether a tax or cap and trade was better than the other, with the remaining 10 invariant between a tax or cap and trade.

My overall impression is that in judging Dr Finkel’s CET recommendation, most of the panel might agree with the proposition that the “the perfect is the enemy of the roughly acceptable”. I surmise that in a decade past, many members of the panel would have held out for greater perfection, but now they think prevarication is more cost than benefit, and it is better to move on and make the best of the cards that have been dealt.

In emissions reduction policy the mainstream advice from Australia’s economists has not been persuasive. But this is hardly unique to Australia, as the pervasiveness of regulatory approaches in other countries shows. Perhaps an unavoidably compromised policy that is nonetheless well executed may be better than a brilliant policy that is poorly executed. Even if they could not have been more persuasive in design, Australia’s economists should still have much that is useful to contribute in execution. Hopefully more can be drawn into it.

Read the panel’s full responses below:

This is an edited version of the summary of the report’s findings originally published by the ESA Monash Forum.

Bruce Mountain does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond the academic appointment above.