The Conversation

While China launches its new energy market, Australia is still lagging behind in implementing a mechanism to control carbon emissions Peter Christoff, Associate Professor, School of Geography, University of Melbourne Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

Walter Munk might be the most under-appreciated man in surfing, but he is a big deal in ocean science. If you've ever checked a surf forecast before paddling out, you have him to thank. Paul Spence, Senior Lecturer, Climate Change Research Centre, UNSW Shane Keating, Senior Lecturer in Mathematics and Oceanography, UNSW Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

A new study gives insight into the strange breeding behaviour of banded stilts. These water birds fly thousand of kilometres to nest in temporary desert salt lakes. Reece Pedler, PhD student, Deakin University Andy T.D. Bennett, Professor, Deakin University Raoul Ribot, Lecturer in Ecology, Deakin University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

By rebranding coal as 'dispatchable', the government's National Energy Guarantee looks set to preserve demand for coal-fired power by giving it a new role – one it's not well equipped to fulfil. John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of Queensland Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

The federal government has announced a new National Energy Guarantee focused on electricity reliability, after deciding not to implement a clean energy target. Alan Pears, Senior Industry Fellow, RMIT University Anna Skarbek, CEO at ClimateWorks Australia, Monash University Dylan McConnell, Researcher at the Australian German Climate and Energy College, University of Melbourne Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

Animals that evolved in cold parts of the world usually have lighter skin. If a light-skinned animal has blood vessels close to the surface of their ear skin, this will make the ears look pink. Wayne Iwan Lee Davies, Adjunct Research Fellow, School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia Shaun Collin, Winthrop Professor/WA Premier's Research Fellow, School of Biological Sciences and the Oceans Institute, University of Western Australia Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

The outgoing Threatened Species Commissioner has downplayed the importance of land clearing as a threat to Australia's plants and animals. But it's the biggest threat, and magnifies the others too. Brendan Wintle, Professor of Conservation Ecology, University of Melbourne, University of Melbourne Sarah Bekessy, Professor, RMIT University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

The National Energy Guarantee promises to make electricity supply more reliable, cheaper and less polluting. Michael Hopkin, Environment + Energy Editor, The Conversation Madeleine De Gabriele, Deputy Editor: Energy + Environment, The Conversation Wes Mountain, Deputy Multimedia Editor, The Conversation Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

The new policy will put the onus on electricity retailers to cut emissions while guaranteeing reliability. And while the scheme isn't perfect, it offers a rare opportunity for bipartisanship. David Blowers, Energy Fellow, Grattan Institute Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

The amount of atmospheric energy available to thunderstorms will increase in response to climate change, putting the tropics and subtropics at risk of being lashed with more intense storms. Martin Singh, Lecturer, School of Earth, Atmosphere and Environment, Monash University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

Is Australia undervaluing its most valuable natural asset by only charging $6.50 a day to visit the Great Barrier Reef? And would it help if tourists were asked to pay more? Michael Vardon, Visiting Fellow at the Fenner School, Australian National University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

Increased sightings of endangered species doesn't mean it's recovering – but that's the argument being made by the native forest logging industry. David Lindenmayer, Professor, The Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

While Tony Abbott's London climate speech has been widely criticised, research suggests his views have long had a sympathetic ear in Australia's coal heartland. Vanessa Bowden, Associate Lecture in Social Enquiry, University of Newcastle Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

As the Clean Energy Target fades away, perhaps a Dispatchable Reliable Energy Target will be innocuous enough to pass the Liberal party room and the Senate. Alan Pears, Senior Industry Fellow, RMIT University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

New data from a NASA satellite show in unprecedented detail the flow of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Future satellites should even be able to detect the signatures of individual power stations. Pep Canadell, CSIRO Scientist, and Executive Director of the Global Carbon Project, CSIRO Alex Held, Principal Research Scientist, CSIRO Cathy Trudinger, Senior Research Scientist, CSIRO Peter Rayner, Professorial Fellow, University of Melbourne Vanessa Haverd, Research Scientist, Carbon Water Observatory, CSIRO Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

Australia's species, like this green python, are remarkable and need far better protection. Euan Ritchie, Senior Lecturer in Ecology, Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University Dale Nimmo, ARC DECRA Fellow, Charles Sturt University Don Driscoll, Professor in Terrestrial Ecology, Deakin University Geoffrey Heard, Lecturer in Wildlife Ecology and Management, Charles Sturt University Megan C Evans, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Environmental Policy, The University of Queensland Tim Doherty, Research Fellow, Deakin University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

How do you determine the financial benefit of cutting a tree down, versus leaving it standing? Environmental accounting offers some insight. Heather Keith, Research Fellow in Ecology, Australian National University David Lindenmayer, Professor, The Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University Michael Vardon, Visiting Fellow at the Fenner School, Australian National University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

Talk of the government preparing to 'walk away' from the Clean Energy Target proposal is unnecessarily cynical. Tony Wood, Program Director, Energy, Grattan Institute Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.

Home buyers across Australia could face higher energy bills because of a loophole that allows builders to sidestep energy efficiency requirements.

Since the early 2000s, all new homes built in Australia have to meet minimum thermal performance standards. In about 70% of cases, these homes are accredited using star ratings under the federal government’s Nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme (NatHERS). Most new houses have to meet a minimum 6-star rating. The higher the rating, the more energy-efficient the home.

Besides the star rating system, there are three other ways to meet the thermal efficiency standards, including one known as Verification Using a Reference Building (VURB),, which awards a pass or fail rather than stars. It was designed to allow houses with alternative building techniques to comply with the standards.

But some builders are using this approach to accredit houses that fall well short of the 6-star standard under the NatHERS system – a tactic that is legal under the current system.

One consulting engineering firm, Structerre, which is active in Western Australia, Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales, has advertised that it has saved builders thousands by adopting the pass/fail approach under VURB. Structerre declined to comment for this article.

A Structerre advertisement showing how a double storey residential building originally rated 4.5 stars using NatHERS and using the VURB pathway was able to meet energy compliance without adding cavity insulation or upgraded glazing. Structerre website

By using VURB, builders can forego installing items that would ordinarily be needed to gain a minimum 6-star rating, such as cavity insulation or upgraded glazing.

Upgrading a home from a 4.5-star rating to 6 stars can typically cost tens of thousands of dollars. It is even more expensive for double-storey homes on narrow blocks with sub-optimal orientation.

Energy uncertainty

It is hard to say exactly how much higher energy bills would be in a home that falls below 6-star standard, because of the many other factors that influence bills. But major Australian house builder BGC Residential estimates that people with a 4-star or 5-star rated home could pay about 30% more than people living in a 6-star home.

A CSIRO study of more than 400 Australian houses built in the past 10 years found that higher-rated homes saved significantly on winter heating costs.

However, a study of 10 homes in Perth found significant variation in energy use between homes with the same rating.

The picture is complicated further by a phenomenon known as the takeback effect, in which some people in energy-efficient homes actually increase their energy consumption.

Misleading standards

Michael Bartier, executive general manager of BCG Residential, one of the first companies to adopt NatHERS 6-star rating as a standard building practice, said the use of loopholes could harm the industry’s reputation and cost buyers money.

“My concern is that there are a large number of homes built in the past 12-18 months that have not achieved the NatHERS 6-star rating, without the owners’ or customers’ knowledge. These homes could be rated as low as 2.7 stars and suffering poor thermal performance, costing the owners significantly more in heating and cooling energy costs and affecting final resale value,” he said.

While universal certificates are generated for homes found to comply with NatHERS, making them easier to track, it’s hard to tell how many homes have been signed off with VURB, as recording is not mandatory for those homes.

Some industry insiders are concerned that, without public scrutiny, the use of this loophole will increase.

A better picture

CSIRO, which owns the software used for NatHERS ratings, has developed a database of new homes’ energy ratings across Australia.

It currently has data for most homes built since May 2016, and is aiming to make its data available to the public. Some preliminary data are shown in the map below.

Average star rating for homes built since May 2016, in a selection of Australian climate zones. It does not show all homes, and in particular does not show homes that met compliance using the VURB pathway. Data courtesy of CSIRO.

Click on the zones to see the average star ratings.

There are more drawbacks besides the potential impact on energy bills. The National Construction Code states that home thermal efficiency standards are also important for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

In 2013, Australia’s residential and commercial buildings were responsible for almost a quarter of the nation’s greenhouse emissions.

Several groups have warned about the use of the VURB pathway, including CSIRO, state governments, and the federal Department of the Environment and Energy. But it is unclear whether these warnings will catch the eye of home buyers.

The Australian Building Codes Board is reviewing the system (it is open for public comment until February 2018), and plans to “strengthen the technical provisions” in the 2019 version of the National Construction Code.

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

Tonight former Prime Minister Tony Abbott will be in London to give a speech to the Global Warming Policy Foundation, titled “Daring to Doubt”, in which he will reportedly argue that climate policy is “shutting down industries”. (It’s not clear if he’s bought carbon offsets for the 10 tonnes of carbon that a return flight to the UK will release into the atmosphere.)

Whatever talking points and soundbites he presents will inevitably be interpreted as yet another salvo in the Coalition’s ferocious and interminable war over energy and climate policy.

Read more: Two new books show there’s still no goodbye to messy climate politics

The venue is the same one where Abbott’s mentor John Howard U-turned on his earlier climate policy U-turn. In a 2013 speech, Howard disparagingly declared that “one religion is enough”, despite having belatedly pledged in 2006 to introduce an emissions trading scheme, only to lose to Kevin Rudd the following year.

Who are the GWPF anyway?

The Global Warming Policy Foundation was set up in 2009 by Nigel Lawson, who in the 1980s served as Chancellor of the Exchequer (the UK equivalent of treasurer) in Margaret Thatcher’s government, but is arguably more famous these days as Nigella’s dad.

The foundation was founded just days after the first so-called “Climategate” emails were leaked. But after complaints, in 2014 the UK Charity Commission rejected the notion that the organisation provides an educational resource, concluding that:

The [GWPF] website could not be regarded as a comprehensive and structured educational resource sufficient to demonstrate public benefit. In areas of controversy, education requires balance and neutrality with sufficient weight given to competing arguments.

Ahead of the Commission’s report, the Global Warming Policy Forum was born as the organisation’s campaigning arm, free from the regulations that govern charities.

Despite its loud demands for crystal-clear transparency about climate science, and its repeated claims that scientists are swayed by big fat grants, the GWPF is oddly cagey about its own funding. In a 2012 BBC Radio programme, Lawson said he relied on friends who “tend to be richer than the average person and much more intelligent than the average person”. An investigation by the website DeSmog has dug up some more information.

More recently the GWP Forum has been in the news because it appointed a pro-Brexit oil company boss to its board and because in August Lawson appeared on BBC Radio to attack Al Gore, accusing the Nobel prizewinning climate activist of peddling “the same old claptrap” and adding: “People often fail to change and he says he hasn’t changed, he’s like the man who goes around saying ‘the end of the world is nigh’ with a big placard”.

Read more: A brief history of Al Gore’s climate missions to Australia

Lawson wasn’t done. He also claimed that “according to the official figures, during this past 10 years, if anything, mean global temperature, average world temperature, has slightly declined”.

Factcheckers were quick off the mark, and the BBC was chided by, among others, Professor Brian Cox (a year on from bringing his graph to Q&A to try to educate the British-Australian politician Malcolm Roberts).

Days later Lawson admitted that his figures were not from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but from a meteorologist who works for the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank founded by Charles Koch.

Abbott the weathervane

Anyway, back to Abbott. Digging around in the archives throws up some amusing surprises about him, as befits a man who has been making headline since 1977. In 1994 an environmental campaign to recreate Tasmania’s Lake Pedder found an unusual ally in the newly minted Member for Warringah, who wrote an article in The Australian that plaintively asked:

If we can renovate old houses and old cars, rejuvenate works of art, recreate forgotten languages and restore degraded bushland, why can’t we rehabilitate the site of a redundant dam?

Abbott seems not to have been particularly exercised by climate policy during the first decade of his parliamentary career. But once the issue hit the top of the political agenda, Abbott was – in his own words to Malcolm Turnbull – “a bit of a weathervane”.

He helped convince Howard to agree to some sort of ETS proposal during the ultimately futile bid to fend off Kevin Rudd in 2007. In July 2009, in a front-page story in The Australian headed “Abbott – we have to vote for ETS”, he was quoted as saying:

The [Rudd] government’s emissions trading scheme is the perfect political response to the public’s fears. It’s a plausible means to limit carbon emissions that doesn’t impose any obvious costs on voters.

However, by September 2009, with Malcolm Turnbull’s leadership on the rocks (remember Godwin Grech?), Abbott made a fateful trip to Beaufort in rural Victoria, and discovered that the room loved him saying “climate change is absolute crap”. The weathervane had made an abrupt about-face.

As Paul Kelly notes in his 2014 opus Triumph and Demise, then-Senator Nick Minchin was crucial in convincing Abbott that there was no serious electoral price to be paid in opposing Kevin Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

Turnbull was on the ropes, and Abbott won the leadership ballot by one vote. As David Marr recounts, the party was almost as stunned as the nation. “God Almighty,” one of the Liberals cried in the party room that day. “What have we done?”

The ensuing years need no extended recap, though two points are worth mentioning. The first is the admission by Abbott’s former chief of staff Peta Credlin that the “carbon tax” that was going to be the end of the world… wasn’t a carbon tax.

The second is that former environment minister Greg Hunt recently rebutted the claim that backbenchers prevented further cuts to the Renewable Energy Target under Abbott’s prime ministership.

Backed into a corner

The upshot is that Abbott has, as Philip Coorey recently observed, totally painted himself into a corner on energy and renewables.

Mind you, it may not matter that much to him, given that his apparent aim is not to “do a Rudd” and return to the helm, but simply to drive a wrecking ball through Malcolm Turnbull’s prime ministership – with climate and energy policy as collateral damage.

Read more: Coal and the Coalition: the policy knot that still won’t untie

As Abbott accepts another pat on the back from a roomful of climate deniers in London, we may wonder how long business interests in Australia will tolerate his wrecking, undermining and sniping. There is bewilderment and dismay at the destabilising effect on policy.

Among the business lobby, BHP has evidently forced the departure of Brendan Pearson as head of the Minerals Council in protest at the council’s similarly backward stance. That much is within their gift. But with regard to the Coalition government, those businesses can do little but despair at the handful of recalcitrant MPs who have nominated climate policy as the ditch in which they will die, in service of the culture war.

The hot air just doesn’t seem to be letting up, any more than our hot summers will in the future.