Feed aggregator

Even at current market prices, various different energy storage options make economic sense for renewable energy projects in some locations, according to new research from MIT.

Milder winters and hotter summers pose a threat to some of Australia's most loved apple varieties.

Solgen Energy has completed the installation of 175MW of ground-mounted and rooftop solar systems across the NBN.

The UK is almost certain to miss its EU 2020 targets for renewable energy, the National Grid says.

ARCHAEOLOGY: Early Polynesian sailors criss-crossed the Pacific for hundreds of years, travelling as far as 2,500 kilometres, according to a new chemical analysis of centuries-old stone tools.

Meet the furry stars of Singapore who live in Marina Bay, the heart of Singapore's central business district.

What has been the human and scientific impact of cloning since Dolly the sheep's birth in 1996?

An electric field could help avoid getting any closer than this. Sharkdiver.com/Wikimedia Commons

A wearable electric shark deterrent can effectively repel great white sharks, according to our independent tests of the device.

The manufacturers of the A$749 Shark Shield Freedom 7TM say it works by emitting an electric field around the wearer. This causes uncomfortable muscle spasms in sharks that swim too close and discourages them from coming into contact.

Our research, published in the journal PLoS ONE, shows that the device does indeed make sharks keep their distance. Upon first encounter with a Shark Shield, all approaching great white sharks were effectively deterred, staying an average of 1.3m away from a baited canister with the device attached.

After multiple approaches, individual great white sharks showed signs of habituation to the Shark Shield, coming an average of 12cm closer on each successive approach. Despite this increase in tolerance, 89% of white sharks continued to be deterred from biting or interacting with the bait.

Don’t take the bait

We carried out our testing in Mossel Bay, South Africa, in 2014. We used custom-built cameras equipped with bait and either an inactive (control) or active Shark Shield. Using a video analysis technique traditionally used to measure the size of fish, we were able to determine exactly how closely the sharks approached the device.

We analysed a total of 322 encounters involving 41 individual white sharks, ranging from 2m to 4m long.

Only one great white shark came into contact with the bait in the presence of an active Shark Shield, and only after multiple approaches. The interaction in question simply involved a bump of the bait canister rather than a full bite. In contrast, bites were common during control trials.

Although the effectiveness of the Shark Shield probably varies between shark species, it is encouraging to note its effect on great white sharks, the species implicated in the majority of fatal incidents worldwide. This suggests it could be an important safety consideration for a range of ocean users such as surfers, divers, spear fishers and open-water swimmers.

We also found no evidence that the Shark Shield attracted sharks from further away, which is a common myth among surfers.

A useful tool

Besides showing that the Shark Shield can ward off sharks, our method provides an accurate way to test the effectiveness of any type of shark deterrent that is currently available or likely to enter the market.

But, most importantly for now, we have finally given the public some evidence that there is an effective way to reduce the risk of a negative encounter with a shark.

Instead of the redundant debate about culling sharks as a response to shark-bite incidents, ocean-goers can now proactively take extra precautions, by using proven technology to reduce their already very low risk of injury.

There are many shark deterrent devices on the market, particularly those that use electric or magnetic fields. But without robust, independent scientific evaluation we can’t be sure which of these products actually work. In fact, not only may some devices not be as effective as others, but it is also possible that some of them could actually attract sharks rather than repel them.

Robust scientific evaluation of these types of devices will help the public make informed decisions about how they can reduce their risk of encountering a shark.

It’s important to note that the likelihood of being involved in a negative encounter with a shark is exceptionally low. As a result, some will argue that the use of expensive technology to mitigate that risk even further is unnecessary. Furthermore, no device is likely to guarantee 100% protection from any species of shark.

But at present, under the conditions in which we tested it, this is one device that does seem to offer a genuine benefit. So if you feel that you need extra protection from sharks when entering the water, this device will offer you exactly that.

This article was written with the help of Channing Egeberg, a University of Western Australia marine euroecology MSc graduate and cofounder of Support our Sharks.

Ryan Kempster received funding from WA State Government Shark Hazard Mitigation Applied Research Program, which provided over $220,000 for this research as part of a larger package to investigate the effectiveness of existing shark deterrents. He is also affiliated with the non-profit shark conservation group Support Our Sharks.

Shaun Collin received funding from the WA State Government Shark Hazard Mitigation Applied Research Program, which provided $220,000 for this research.

YouGov survey of more than 800 people shows 76% want to bring their cities in line with European limits on air pollution

The UK may be on its way out of the EU but more than three-quarters (76%) of people want clean air zones to bring their cities into line with European standards, according to a YouGov poll.

The poll comes as new forecasting suggests London will still breach the limits for another 14 years without further action and the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, prepares to make a major speech on pollution-cutting measures on Tuesday.

Continue reading...

Male and female mountain chicken frogs that were sole survivors of deadly disease are hoped to begin breeding on Montserrat for the first time since 2009

The last two remaining wild mountain chicken frogs living on Montserrat have been reunited, and are hoped to begin breeding on the Caribbean island for the first time since 2009.

Last month, a project took the last female and relocated her into the territory of the remaining male as part of a 20-year recovery plan for the species, one of the world’s largest and rarest frogs that exists on just two Caribbean islands, Montserrat and Dominica.

Continue reading...

Dr Chris Lintott explains why he's looking forward to Juno's arrival at Jupiter.

A trip to the interior of the Antarctica, a trip of pure escapism.

The Bloodhound supersonic car project is back on track thanks to new sponsorship, and now aims to break the land speed record in October 2017.

Growing trend to lay fake lawns instead of real grass causes loss of habitat for wildlife and creates waste that will never biodegrade

Environmentalists have warned that a growing trend to lay artificial lawns instead of real grass threatens the loss of wildlife and habitat across Britain.

From local authorities who purchase in bulk for use in street scaping, to primary schools for children’s play areas and in the gardens of ordinary suburban family homes, the sight of pristine, green artificial grass is becoming a familiar sight. One company has registered a 220% year-on-year increase in trade of the lawns.

Continue reading...

The Cairns Frog Safe project blames neonicotinoids for population decline and malformations, but cannot attract government or academic interest

The head of Australia’s only dedicated frog hospital believes powerful insecticides are behind a staggering decline in frog populations along the Queensland coast.

Related: Neonicotinoids: new warning on pesticide harm to bees

Continue reading...

Chinese solar giant unveils four PV-powered – “zero charging” – EVs, which it says can travel 80km a day on solar power alone.

Huge rich-metal deposits on the ocean floor could transform the global commodities market but there are fears mining them could harm rare ecosystems

A scientific expedition has been launched from the UK to explore the mining of rich metal deposits on the deep ocean floor, which are the focus of a new gold rush around the world.

The UK research vessel, the RSS James Cook, left Southampton on Thursday, heading for the underwater ridge in the middle of the Atlantic where volcanic activity drives hot springs, also known as black smokers.

Continue reading...

The Bramble Cay Melomys is arguably the first mammal driven extinct by climate change, rather than direct human interaction. Ian Bell/EHP/State of Queensland, CC BY-SA

Australia recently gained an unenviable title: perhaps the first country to lose a mammal species to climate change. The Bramble Cay Melomys, a native rodent found on one tiny sand island in the remote northern regions of the Great Barrier Reef, reportedly became extinct after rising seas destroyed its habitat.

The melomys' likely extinction is a symptom of the massive changes taking place across the natural world. Faced with these changes, we cannot possibly save every species without increasing funding for conservation.

We should be trying to conserve everything we can, or at least minimising the number of plants, animals and ecosystems that are lost. The problem is that Australia’s conservation laws presume that we can preserve everything in its natural state. But in a changing world, we’ll have to be more flexible than that.

The new nature

Our conservation laws were drafted on the assumption that, if human intervention could be avoided or managed, plants and animals would survive in their natural, pristine environments.

We now know that that is not the case. Nature is dynamic. Humans have had a pervasive influence on the environment and recent research suggests that pristine environments no longer exist.

Climate change will rapidly accelerate environmental change. Shifting temperature and rainfall will shift the specific conditions that species depend on to survive. Everything will be on the move.

On top of these gradual climate shifts, more frequent and intense bushfires, storms and heatwaves will destroy some habitats and increase the threatened status of many species. In some cases, these extreme events may result in localised extinctions.

Climate change is creating new problems for biodiversity (such as new invasive species) and is making existing problems worse (such as by changing fire patterns).

What does conservation mean if we can’t save everything?

Far from making conservation law irrelevant, these challenges mean that conservation policy and laws are more important than ever.

Expanding land and marine reserves, restoring and connecting habitat with other areas, and reducing other threats such land clearing or feral animals are all important climate adaptation strategies.

But many Australian plants and animals will not be able to move fast enough to escape extreme events or to keep pace with their specific climate niches on their own. To conserve these species, we may need to engage in high‑intervention conservation strategies, such as assisted colonisation.

This involves moving an individual, population or species to a place where it has never been found before. This tactic is being investigated for the endangered Western Swamp Tortoise in Western Australia, as its wetland habitat begins to dry out.

Conservation laws in Australia were not designed to accommodate these kinds of dynamic and proactive approaches to conservation management.

Legal road blocks

Current conservation laws promote keeping or returning the environment to what it used to be, whether that is pristine or not.

In a recent paper, we looked at three ways laws may impede conservation in a changing world.

First, current laws emphasise maintaining the current status and location of ecosystems and their constituent parts, or returning them to an “undisturbed” state.

Second, they place high value on biodiversity that is rare, native and wild.

Finally, they emphasise reserves (especially on public land) as the sites for most conservation effort.

For example, national park laws typically require agencies to conserve national parks in their natural state. This is usually defined by the plants and animals that are already there or that have been found there in the past.

But some species might need to be moved into national parks, even if they have never been found there before, or out of national parks to somewhere more climatically suitable. Current laws do not let us do this.

Rather than an outdated idea of what is “natural”, we need new objectives that focus on diversity and ecosystem function and health. If introducing a plant or animal into a national park will increase its chance of surviving under climate change and will not undermine the health of the park’s ecosystems, the introduction should not be excluded just because the species is not “native” to that specific park. This approach would help species adapt through movement across boundaries.

Letting species go

Another example of a potential legal roadblock is the emphasis on individual threatened species in both legal protection and funding. For instance, the Coalition government has pledged AU$5 million for specific actions to protect some of the most endangered of Australia’s listed threatened species.

But this is an example of assuming that we can save everything. The contracting ranges and already precarious status of many listed species make it unlikely that we will be able to conserve them all, and impossible to do so in their historic locations.

Choices based on what species we fund are rarely transparent and the public is rarely consulted about what we value the most. We need to have a conversation about how we value species and ecosystems in a changing world. If more people realised that we cannot save everything, perhaps more people would demand that appropriate funding is allocated to saving as much as possible.

While funding remains limited, we need objectives that reflect the certainty of some loss of species in the wild and that clearly define the criteria we are using for targeting some species for protection while letting others go.

Our conservation laws direct how we will act to save species and ecosystems under climate change, and whether we will succeed. But climate change makes our current objectives unachievable.

We must not give up on conserving as much as we can as the climate changes. Laws can be used to help us achieve this goal. But we urgently need a national conversation about what reform is needed to ensure the best possible conservation results for Australia’s precious wildlife, plants and ecosystems.

The authors do 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.

The world’s largest coal mining company, Coal India Limited, has announced a major step towards implementation of its ambitious solar power goals.

Glen Torridon, Liathach, Highlands The path that worms up alongside the waterfalls is invisible until we’re on it

From Glen Torridon, Liathach looks impregnable, with little sign of a way upwards; the path that worms up alongside the waterfalls of the Allt an Doire Ghairbh is invisible until we’re on it. The vast bulwarks and bastions of rock rise into a ceiling of white cloud, their full extent obscured.

We climb unhurriedly, content to wait for the forecasted “cloud free Munros” to materialise.

Continue reading...