Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jaya Dantas, Deputy Chair, Academic Board; Dean International, Faculty of Health Sciences, and Professor of International Health, Curtin University

Earlier this week, Moderna announced positive results for its phase 3 clinical trial of a combined vaccine against COVID and influenza.

So what exactly did the trial find? And what sort of impact would a two-in-one COVID and flu vaccine have on public health? Let’s take a look.

Combination vaccines are already used for other diseases

Combination vaccines have been successfully used for several decades in Australia and around the world.

For example, the DTP vaccine, a shot that combines protection against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough), was first administered in 1948.

The DTP vaccine has since been further combined to offer protection against other diseases. A hexavalent vaccine, which protects against six diseases – diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b (an infection that can cause brain swelling) – is today part of routine childhood immunisation programs in Australia and elsewhere.

Another important combination vaccine is the MMR vaccine, given to children to protect against measles, mumps and rubella.

So what did the trial find?

Moderna’s phase 3 trial included roughly 8,000 participants across two age groups. Half were adults aged 50 to 64. The other half were aged 65 and up.

In both age groups, participants were randomised to either receive the combined vaccine (called mRNA-1083) or a control. The control groups received a COVID vaccine and a suitable flu vaccine delivered separately.

The control group in the 50-to-64 age category were given the Fluarix flu vaccine, as well as Moderna’s mRNA COVID vaccine, Spikevax. The over-65 control group received Spikevax alongside Fluzone HD, an enhanced flu vaccine designed specifically for older adults.

The study evaluated safety, including any reactions after vaccination, and the protective immune response the vaccines produced.

Moderna reported the combined vaccine elicited a higher immune response in both age groups against COVID and three influenza strains, compared to the co-administered shots.

From a safety perspective, the combined vaccine was well tolerated. Adverse reactions were similar across the experimental and control groups. The most common side effects included muscle aches, fatigue and pain at the injection site.

While the trial results are promising, they are yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, which means independent experts haven’t yet verified them. And further research may be required to test how the combined vaccine works in younger age groups.

What are the advantages of combined vaccines?

We cannot overstate the importance of vaccines. Each year they prevent up to 5 million deaths around the world from a range of life-threatening infections.

At the same time, we can always do more to boost vaccination uptake, especially in areas with fewer resources and among vulnerable populations.

Combination vaccines have a variety of advantages. For example, the need for fewer injections reduces costs for health systems, decreases storage requirements and reduces the burden on parents. All of these things can be especially valuable in low-income countries.

Notably, research shows combination vaccines make it more likely people will take up routine vaccinations.

Two important diseases

Every year, particularly during the winter months, millions of people contract respiratory infections. Indeed, parts of Australia are reported to be facing rapid increases in flu cases at the moment.

According to the World Health Organization, globally, roughly 3 million to 5 million people experience severe influenza annually, and around 650,000 people will die from the disease.

COVID has resulted in more than 7 million deaths around the world to date.

As the COVID pandemic has continued, we’ve seen pandemic fatigue setting in, as some people appear to have become complacent about their COVID shots. A 2023 study in Australia found 30% of the surveyed population were hesitant about and 9% were resistant to taking COVID boosters.

Uptake of the flu vaccine, which many people are in the habit of getting annually, may be higher. That said, in Australia the current flu vaccine rates for 2024 are still fairly low: 53% for adults over 65 years, 26% for those aged 50 to 65, and lower for younger age groups.

A two-in-one COVID and flu vaccine could be an important public health tool to increase vaccine coverage against these two important diseases. Beyond protecting individuals’ health, this would have flow-on benefits for the economy and our health system.

Moderna said it will present its trial data at an upcoming medical conference and submit it for publication. The company has also said it will soon apply for regulatory approval, with the possibility of supplying the combined vaccine in 2025.

At the same time, Pfizer and BioNTech also have late-stage trials in progress for a combined COVID and flu vaccine. We will await further developments with interest.

Professor Jaya Dantas is Dean International and Dean, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging in the Faculty of Health Sciences at Curtin University and Professor of International Health at Curtin School of Population Health. She is working on projects funded by Healthway, Lotterywest and DISER. She has lived experience of infectious diseases in India and Africa.

– ref. Results are looking promising for a combined COVID and flu vaccine. Here’s how it could benefit public health – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/232278

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Irina Ponomareva, Adjunct Research Fellow in Griffith Center for Social and Cultural Research (GCSCR), Griffith University

Investigation of a sacred area at Avon Downs in Jangga Country, Central Queensland, has uncovered evidence of stone tool production in a place that was traditionally restricted to women.

We detail our findings in newly published research in collaboration with archaeological expert Liz Hatte and Jangga Elders Colin McLennan and Marie Wallace.

Our excavation of the layered sediments at Avon Downs reveals a long history of raw stone extraction and tool making. In the short period of our study, we recorded about 1,500 stone artefacts on the surface and under the ground.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg, as we expect more detailed evidence of tool production to be found beneath the site’s surface and in neighbouring areas.

By dating these artefacts, we have traced a 7,000-year history of continuous stone tool production by Aboriginal women – including objects traditionally associated with men. We are also the first team to ever date a sacred Aboriginal women’s area.

Hundreds of generations of tool making

Using a technique called optically stimulated luminescence, we measured the age of individual sand grains within the artefact-rich layers of the hill slope. We were then able to date the artefacts by association.

The uncovered artefacts varied in age from about 430 years ago (before the first Europeans arrived) to some 7,000 years ago. This implies the site was used for stone tool production and possibly as a sacred women’s area for hundreds of generations.

Jangga Elders Colin McLennan and Marie Wallace have a shared memory extending as far back as at least six generations. They understand the site has always been forbidden to men, as it continues to be today.

While some of the relevant sacred knowledge remains restricted, we can report Jangga women came to Gaio Nanhi Bura (women’s sacred place) to give birth and perform associated ceremonies until the turn of the 20th century.

Some of the stone tools were used in sacred ways, such as for cutting the umbilical cord of newborn babies, says Wallace. Drill points, ochre and a grinding stone and muller are further evidence of everyday tool making and decoration.

The rare discovery of an unfinished axe, ready to be ground and polished, is also somewhat surprising, as axe making is typically associated with male crafters.

The site remains a direct link between modern Jangga women and their ancestors. Today’s Jangga women who have visited and worked on the site describe feeling a strong sense of peace and belonging, as well as the presence of their ancestors.

Railway project disruptions

Like many other Aboriginal sites in Australia, the Avon Downs Women’s Area has faced threats. It sits in the way of the North Galilee Basin Rail Project, which stretches from the Carmichael coal mine to the port at Abbot Point.

Planning for this project started in 2012, prompting cultural heritage surveys, assessments and negotiations with Traditional Owners.

In 2014, the sacred area at Avon Downs was revealed following a survey and consultations with Jangga Elders. The artefacts themselves, which had been partially hidden by thick spinifex grass, were discovered in 2020 during cultural heritage monitoring before the clearance of native forest.

After extended negotiations with the Carmichael project representatives, and some news coverage of the archaeological discoveries, a solution was found.

For the benefit of future study, the site was conserved as a protected portion inside the rail corridor – but not without any loss. This portion is a fragmented piece of a much larger complex of camp sites and knapping floors (areas where stone tools were shaped) – but there is no longer free access between these individual sites.

So while the railway project will not run directly through, it has still compromised the integrity of the area.

Protecting sacred area

Sacred Aborignal women’s sites are often difficult to protect in their entirety. It can be challenging to demonstrate their cultural value when the associated knowledge is restricted to a few members of the Aboriginal community.

The protection of these sites has been hampered by past misunderstandings of Aboriginal cultures, as well as racism, sexism and misogyny.

Throughout Australia, there are only a handful of examples where Aboriginal women have chosen to disclose secret information to protect sacred women’s sites for future generations.

When explaining the importance of protecting and recording Jangga traditional knowledge and culture, Wallace emphasised the Jangga people’s belief that such sacred places can even be dangerous:

You are not supposed to touch anything, or take away something. They can make you sick.

Jangga people maintain the sanctity of these areas in their collective memory, providing a seamless connection between living memory and the dated sequence of sediments and artefacts.

And while their current cultural traditions in the Avon Downs Women’s Area can be traced back to several hundred years, we may be able to extend this to several thousand as more archaeological evidence becomes available.

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 have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. We dated a sacred Aboriginal women’s site used for birthing ceremonies and discovered 7,000 years of tool making – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231717

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darius von Guttner Sporzynski, Historian, Australian Catholic University

Last night, millions of people will have tuned into Netflix and other streaming services to binge their favourite shows, including the (much anticipated) second part of Bridgerton season three.

Streaming services such as Netflix, Disney+, Stan and Prime Video have habituated us to the “all at once” series drop. And even as some services try to find ways to break the binge model, many commentators have bid farewell to the “the good old days” of appointment viewing.

Meanwhile, experts have highlighted the health concerns associated with “problematic bingeing”, including increased anxiety and depression.

But there’s an important detail missing in these conversations. And that is the fact that bingeing – the act of unrestrained and excessive indulgence – is nothing new. In fact, it exemplifies an age-old human desire to be completely immersed in story.

Far from being a new behaviour spawned by the digital age, bingeing is rooted in human history.

An ancient practice

Much like you might binge Baby Reindeer, Eric or The Walking Dead today, humans have always sought absorbing narrative experiences.

Before writing emerged, ancient oral storytelling captivated people across cultures, providing entertainment, knowledge transmission and cultural education.

Research published last year suggests Palawa Aboriginal stories from Tasmania can be traced back to events that happened 12,000 years ago, which means they may be among the oldest recorded oral stories in the world. Stories that survive hundreds of generations require constant telling and retelling.

This engagement with stories continued with the advent of written text. For millennia, large text collections has allowed immersive consumption, with examples ranging from the Panchatantra – a compilation of Indian fables dated to around 200BC – to volumes of William Shakespeare’s plays from the 1600s.

Historically, libraries, galleries and museums played a significant role in providing access to large collections of works, including books, as well as artworks and artefacts.

Eventually, the invention of the printing press revolutionised access to texts. Evidence suggests that by the 18th century, avid readers in England (that is, the upper class who could afford books) would devour novels in public or by candlelight – unable to stop until the story ended.

Literature researcher Ana Vogrinčič suggests a sort of “moral panic” emerged as the women of the time got a taste for reading:

reading in bed by the candlelight was believed to risk conflagration, while women laughing out loud over a certain scene or wobbling in emotions over another, in indecent body postures, regularly incited an offensive language, resulting in a heavily stigmatised and stereotyped image of a female novel-reader – a precursor of a modern coach potato. The reading sofa and the television couch certainly represent what 18th-century novel-reading and modern-day television-viewing seem to have in common.

Serialised literature became popular in the 19th century, with more and more writers releasing their work in instalments.

Eventually, the rise of cinema and television provided a new form of immersive storytelling. Access to home videos meant back-to-back viewing, while film screenings and double features mirrored older communal entertainment forms such as public readings and theatre attendances.

Hooked on a feeling

While bingeing has been around for as long as anyone can remember, the internet and streaming have both significantly increased our capacity for it. Perhaps this is why bingeing is framed as a modern phenomenon.

Creators must now design shows with the binge-watching model in mind, using cliffhangers, escapism and continuous arcs to encourage prolonged viewing. All of these factors (and more) combine to make a “bingeable” show.

As to why we love bingeing, this comes down to a complex interplay of emotions and brain chemistry.

Engaging with captivating stories triggers the release of dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with pleasure, to create an addictive experience. At the same time, the human brain craves “closure”, which is something a compelling onscreen narrative will provide.

Shifting values

Bingeing today is often accompanied by feelings of guilt and unproductiveness. This seems to reflect, more than anything else, a shift in societal values regarding leisure time.

At some points in the past, prolonged engagement with stories would have been seen by certain groups as a valuable cultural activity – one that contributes to personal enrichment and social interaction.

For instance, the European Enlightenment movement of the 17th and 18th centuries encouraged people to develop a critical view of the world through as much self-education as possible. This approach to learning was thought to foster intellectual freedom and happiness, and often involved extensive engagement with written works.

Across time and cultures, humans have sought to escape reality and engage emotionally with stories. From ancient oral traditions, to modern streaming, our desire for continuous narrative consumption has remained constant.

Perhaps by recognising this historical precedent, we can come to appreciate our love of bingeing – and not feel so bad about it after all.

Darius von Guttner Sporzynski 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Don’t feel bad about bingeing TV. Humans have binged stories for thousands of years – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231713

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Williams, Associate Professor, Griffith University, Griffith University

Many a government has spent generously to woo voters in election years. Some might even say recklessly.

But, even by that standard, the cash splashed this week by the Queensland Labor government under Premier Steven Miles is eye-watering – not just in dollar terms but also in the choices Treasurer Cameron Dick has made in the run-up to an October election few believe Labor can win.

In offering feel-good “sugar hits” that make the recent federal budget seem like diet cordial, Dick, in his fifth budget, has targeted the four biggest policy issues for voters in Queensland (and every other state and territory): cost of living, youth crime, housing and health.

That’s why he allocated an extra $1.28 billion for more police and to support victims of crime. It’s also why health had an almost unprecedented 10.6% funding increase – hospital ramping is a particularly sore point. Another A$3.1 billion was invested in the “Homes for Queenslanders” program, which offers rental support, while significantly raising the home value threshold before stamp duties are charged.

There’s also a $107 billion “Big Build” infrastructure program over four years to accommodate an exploding population, an issue both widely lamented and acutely felt in Brisbane.

But it’s the government’s cost-of-living relief package that has attracted the most attention and, arguably, the most scorn. By offering a weary electorate $1,000 cash-back on power bills (in addition to the federal government’s recently announced $300), 50 cent fares on all public transport, a 20% reduction in vehicle registrations and $200 vouchers to encourage children into sport – and by delivering a $564 million surplus for 2023-24 – Queensland Labor hopes it can buy a fourth term from financially struggling voters.

But will it really turn Labor’s electoral tide? Public opinion polls since Miles succeeded Annastacia Palaszczuk as premier last December suggest not. In the most recently published poll, a February-May Redbridge survey, Labor recorded a 28% primary vote – down 12 points since the 2020 election and only slightly higher than the Bligh Labor government received when decimated in 2012.

Redbridge pegged the Liberal-National Party’s primary vote at 47% – its highest in a decade – for a two-party-preferred split of 57 to 43%. That translates into a 10-point swing. It would mean Labor loses around 24 seats and the LNP easily forms majority government with up to 60 seats in the 93-seat Legislative Assembly.

Worryingly for Labor, the Redbridge data are consistent with earlier Resolve Strategic, YouGov and Newspoll surveys. All reported similar collapses in Labor’s vote since March.

In short, Queensland voters appear to have stopped listening to Miles and are now embracing the moderate, softly spoken LNP leader, David Crisafulli. In a February-May Resolve Strategic poll, he led Miles as preferred premier by 39 points to 28.

Crisafulli, however, is facing his own hurdles. Journalists and voters are demanding policy detail beyond the LNP’s “parenthood” statements about reducing crime. Crisafulli’s judgment is also being questioned for his early support for a Labor budget he had not even seen.

Nonetheless, there has been an unmistakable appetite for change in Queensland since early 2022, when the once-unassailable Palaszczuk government began its sharp descent amid accusations of compromised integrity and, later, of an allegedly “out of touch” and “red carpet” premier. It was that lost political capital underpinning a once-popular premier that, when burdened with cost-of-living and youth-crime crises, forced Palaszczuk from office in December 2023.

Why, then, will Queensland’s arguably most generous budget go unrewarded at the ballot box?

First, governments rarely receive post-budget public opinion bounces. While the Albanese government’s 2024 budget was reasonably well received, a June YouGov poll placed Labor’s primary vote three points lower than in the April survey. It seems voters simply expect governments to be good economic managers – and do not reward them for it.

Second, Miles’ goodies, designed to be delivered before the October 26 poll, will likely see any voter gratitude evaporate long before ballots are cast.

Third, while vehicle registration is almost universal, regular public transport users and first-home buyers are still a minority of voters.

Fourth, current inflation is “sticky”. Until Queensland voters see reductions in rents, home mortgage interest rates, grocery and fuel prices, a few budgetary treats will do little to mollify a financially stressed electorate.

Finally, the government has arguably overreached in its generosity and undermined its credibility as a responsible economic manager. In squandering last year’s $12.3 billion surplus – the largest ever recorded by a state, thanks to massively hiked coal royalties that have pumped $25 billion into state coffers in just two years – the ever-sceptical Queensland voter now appears plainly cynical in framing the budget as a desperate vote-buying exercise.

So will the budget at least improve Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s fortunes in Queensland? Almost certainly not.

Labor holds just five of Queensland’s 30 federal seats and is unlikely to win more anytime soon. Hemmed in by the deep conservatism of outer-suburban and regional Queensland, Labor, at the height of Albanese’s popularity in 2022, won no seats from the LNP yet lost one to the Greens.

Ultimately, Queenslanders appear to have cast their judgment on the Miles government. They will happily (but not gratefully) grab Labor’s cash, then stroll to the polls and vote LNP in a very decisive swing.

Paul Williams is affiliated with the TJ Ryan Foundation.

– ref. Queensland government splashes the cash around – but it’s unlikely to save it in the October election – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/232259

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katharine Wallis, Professor of General Practice, The University of Queensland

Around one in seven Australians take antidepressants. The decision to start is often made in a time of crisis, with the thought they might help for a period and then be stopped. Most people don’t start antidepressants thinking they will take them for life.

Clinical guidelines recommend only six to 12 months antidepressant therapy for a single episode of moderate to severe depression.

However, about half of people taking antidepressants have been using them for longer than 12 months. People can experience unpleasant withdrawal symptoms when they attempt to stop antidepressants, which leads to them restarting or continuing antidepressants.

A recent Lancet systematic review found around one in six to seven people experienced withdrawal symptoms when stopping antidepressants. This is likely to be an underestimate, as most people included in the studies had been taking antidepressants for only a few months.

What did the researchers find?

The Lancet review, which included 79 studies and 21,000 people, found 15% of antidepressant users experienced withdrawal symptoms after they stopped taking the drug. Common symptoms included dizziness, headache, nausea, insomnia and irritability.

Withdrawal symptoms are more common in people who have been taking antidepressants for a long time. But the Lancet study mainly included people taking antidepressants for only a short time – mostly for around three to six months but sometimes for as little as one week.

So the finding that one in six people who stop taking antidepressants experience withdrawal symptoms is likely an underestimate; this figure applies only to a small subset of people who have taken antidepressants.

The Lancet review also found around 3% of people experienced severe withdrawal symptoms, including thoughts of suicide. Again this is likely to be an underestimate, as it didn’t include longer-term users who are more likely to experience withdrawal symptoms and experience more severe withdrawal symptoms.

Working out what’s actually causing symptoms

Some people continue taking antidepressants long-term in the belief that they are treating or preventing anxiety or depressive symptoms, but since many of the symptoms are similar they may only be treating or preventing withdrawal symptoms

Yet long-term use (longer than 12 months) of antidepressants is not harmless. Taking antidepressants for longer than 12 months can cause:

• emotional numbing
• sexual dysfunction, which may be long-lasting, including low libido and difficulty achieving orgasm in both men and women
• weight gain
• lethargy or fatigue
• increased risk of falls among older people.

Low awareness and recognition of withdrawal symptoms has resulted in both doctors and patients misinterpreting withdrawal symptoms as a “relapse” of anxiety or depression and ongoing need for medication.

The confusion is easy to understand as some of the symptoms of withdrawal are also symptoms of anxiety and/or depression.

Symptoms of withdrawal include nervousness, irritability, insomnia, fatigue and agitation.

Symptoms of anxiety include “feeling nervous, anxious or on edge” and “becoming easily annoyed or irritated”.

Symptoms of depression include “trouble falling or staying asleep”, “feeling tired or having little energy” and “being fidgety or restless”.

But it is possible to distinguish withdrawal from relapse. In addition to feeling anxious and irritable, people going through withdrawal may also experience:

• dizziness, vertigo (sensation of spinning) or light-headedness
• electric shock sensations (brain zaps)
• imbalance
• increased sensitivity to light or noise
• tinnitus
• nausea, diarrhoea or upset stomach
• muscle spasms or cramps
• vivid dreams or nightmares
• tremors
• confusion
• sweating.

How did people used to stop antidepressants?

Until recently, information on how to minimise withdrawal symptoms to enable people to safely stop antidepressants has been limited.

Previous advice was often to halve the dose, halve again and then stop; or to take antidepressants on alternate days; or to switch to a different antidepressant.

But while well-intended, these methods have likely resulted in withdrawal symptoms.

Withdrawal symptoms tend to start within hours, days or sometimes weeks of stopping or decreasing antidepressant dose and can last weeks or longer.

So how can I safely stop?

Brain imaging techniques support a slow tapering of antidepressant drug dose to give a steady change in the brain to minimise withdrawal symptoms.

“Hyperbolic tapering” uses increasingly smaller decreases in drug doses. For example, a tapering schedule of 50mg, 25mg, 15mg, 10mg, 6mg, 4mg, 2mg, 1mg, then 0mg (stop) gives a steady change in the brain.

A slow and hyperbolic decrease of drug dose can minimise withdrawal symptoms, giving the brain time to adjust to being without antidepressants and safely stop.

Updated clinical guidelines now recommend this approach of hyperbolic slow tapering off antidepressants.

At the University of Queensland, we are conducting a randomised controlled trial in general practice testing the effectiveness of antidepressant drug specific hyperbolic tapering schedules developed to support people to safely stop antidepressants.

The antidepressant mini-doses required for tapering are not readily available in Australia. But people can access antidepressant mini doses via a compounding chemist (or for some antidepressants, by crushing a tablet and mixing with water or diluting a liquid formulation, in consultation with your doctor).

If you’re thinking about coming off antidepressants, talk to your doctor, who can support and monitor you through the process of safely stopping.

Katharine Wallis receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Medical Research Future Fund. She is employed by the University of Queensland.

– ref. Many people get withdrawal symptoms when they try to stop antidepressants. So how can you safely stop? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231822

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sasha Grishin, Adjunct Professor of Art History, Australian National University

There have been many exhibitions of ancient Egyptian art held in Australia. Pharaoh, at the National Gallery of Victoria, is outstanding for its scope, scale and presentation.

It is the greatest exhibition of ancient Egyptian art we have ever seen in Australia.

The exhibition comes from the British Museum, holder of the largest and most comprehensive collection of Egyptian antiquities outside the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. Over 500 items have been selected, including monumental sculptures, tomb and temple architecture, coffins, papyri, funerary objects and an extensive display of jewellery.

Numerically, this is the largest (and heaviest) touring exhibition ever mounted by the British Museum and it is the largest exhibition of ancient Egyptian art ever shown in Australia. The effective dramatic display, designed by Peter King who treats the whole space as a cycle from dawn to dusk, occupies all of the major downstairs exhibition spaces at NGV International.

The functionality of art

For a civilisation that left such a huge artistic heritage, it is sobering to remember the ancient Egyptian language had no word for “art”.

Art was something functional that gave permanence to the objects of this world, so they could continue to serve their owners in the next life. Much of the surviving ancient Egyptian art is tomb art, designed to withstand the test of time and to preserve in an idealised form the beauty of balance, order and harmony, while celebrating the absolute power of the pharaoh.

What is it about ancient Egyptian art that holds us spellbound? In part, it is the sense of sublime beauty, its permanence, with forms seemingly unchanging over millennia, its antiquity and its state of preservation. More than anything else it is the fact that it is permeated by a sense of magic, somehow meant to overcome the forces of death.

When a person died, they were mummified and engaged in a ritual involving an interaction with the “ka” (life force) and the “ba” (human essence). They were surrounded by what we could think of as art objects that involved magic spells, magic amulets and protective deities.

What struck me about this exhibition was this sense of spirituality – the mystical otherness. We are presented with a variety of beautiful objects across seven thematic categories. Each section, in a way, comments on the role of the pharaoh in Egyptian life.

The elaborate and the intimate

In an exhibition of this nature, there are a number of memorable objects: the granodiorite Head of a colossal statue, probably King Amenemhat III; the life-size sandstone seated Statue of Pharaoh Sety II wearing emblems marking his royal status; the monumental red granite Statue of a lion erected by Pharaoh Amenhotep III, reinscribed by Pharaoh Tutankhamun; the limestone Statue of future Pharaoh Horemheb and his wife; the huge painted limestone Relief showing King Mentuhotep II wearing the red crown; and the imposing monumental limestone sculpture of the Statue of Ramses II as a high-priest.

All of these are huge works with a dominating presence, a marked frontality and a sense of permanence.

What intrigued me were some of the more intimate, immensely elaborate jewellery-like pieces that served as seals, rings, plaques, amulets, pendants, beads and earrings.

These include: the ornament of a winged Scarab holding a sun-disc, depicting the throne name of King Senusret II with its pieces of lapis lazuli; the faience Throwstick of Pharaoh Akhenaten – an ancient Egyptian boomerang; Girdle with amulets, beads and pendants made of electrum, silver, lapis lazuli, feldspar, amethyst, cornelian, glass; and the Ornament with a bull’s head on a gold mount decorated with uraei and lotus flowers made of gold with the bull’s head carved into a piece of lapis lazuli.

While one may be seduced by the ornamental design, the exquisite craftsmanship and precious materials, there is also something ethereal about these objects of beauty.

They were intended to ward off evil spirits and beg for their owner’s smooth transition into eternal life, where the person could experience life in their present form but free of pain, illness or hardship.

3,000 years of art

The Book of the Dead (more accurately translated as the “Book of Coming Forth by Day”) was a collection of magic spells intended to assist a deceased person’s journey through the underworld. The texts were prepared for a specific person and speak of the needs of a particular individual.

Since I was a child, I loved reading this book as it was the voice of an ancient Egyptian speaking directly to me.

One passage reads:

There is no sin in my body. I have not spoken that which is not true knowingly, nor have I done anything with a false heart. Grant you that I may be like to those favoured ones who are in your following, and that I may be an Osiris greatly favoured of the beautiful god.

This beautiful and significant exhibition traces the art of ancient Egypt for 3,000 years from the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt and the beginnings of the Old Kingdom with the development of hieroglyphs, in about 3000 BCE, through to the Roman conquest.

A solemn divine majesty runs throughout this exhibition as it celebrates the eternal and magical power of art.

Pharaoh is at the National Gallery of Victoria until October 6.

Sasha Grishin 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Pharaoh at the NGV is the greatest exhibition of ancient Egyptian art ever seen in Australia – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/226825

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Woolley, PhD Candidate in Criminology, Deakin University

It’s relatively common for perpetrators of family violence to threaten suicide to control a victim-survivor’s actions. A study by the Australian Institute of Criminology suggests 39% of women who experience coercive control are subject to perpetrators’ threats of self-harm.

Suicide threats can be related to mental health issues, a tactic of family violence, or sometimes both. As a result, victim-survivors may feel pressured to remain in an abusive relationship.

Men who kill their partners are 2,000 times more likely to experience suicidal ideation than the general population. For example, the man who killed Hannah Clarke and her children had threatened suicide multiple times in the lead-up to their murders.

It can then be tricky for police responding to these situations. Victoria Police officers who participated in my recently published research were concerned that when they prioritise suicide prevention over responding to family violence, victim-survivors are sometimes left without protection.

Read more:
Perpetrators of family violence sometimes use threats of suicide to control their partner

What’s standard police protocol?

The intersection between mental health and family violence is a challenging area for both the legal and health systems, with a variety of laws surrounding both. These laws also differ between states and territories.

In Victoria, police have two main avenues to respond to perpetrator suicide threats: mental health legislation and family violence legislation.

Under mental health laws, police can put someone under the care of a hospital or health practitioners to prevent them harming themselves or others.

Meanwhile, suicide threats can be a form of family violence and coercive control. Police can issue a family violence safety notice to the perpetrator. A notice sets conditions to prevent family violence and protect the victim-survivor. For example, standard conditions of a safety notice include not to commit family violence towards a victim-survivor, or expose a child to family violence. If any conditions are broken, police can charge the perpetrator with a criminal offence with a maximum penalty of two years in prison.

Depending on how receptive a perpetrator is to a safety notice, it may stop them committing further abuse towards the victim-survivor, as well as promote accountability.

In Victoria, there are no formal processes that tell police how to address family violence incidents where the perpetrator has threatened suicide. Police are therefore required to decide how to address the matter based on their experience and knowledge.

In Australia, Queensland is the only state that has publicly available guidance on police addressing perpetrator suicide threats. This framework focuses on managing immediate risk and referral pathways.

Unintended consequences

All ten police officers who participated in my study specialised in family violence. They all indicated suicide threats were a commonly-used tactic of coercive control.

Most participants said when they attend a family violence incident where a perpetrator has threatened suicide, they are likely to address the perpetrator’s mental health as their priority. The perpetrator often then goes to hospital for assessment and treatment, when required.

When a person is under the care of a hospital, police cannot issue a family violence safety notice. Police can request notification from a hospital of when a person is released if they are a risk to others. However, this does not always happen, according to police.

As a result, the perpetrator may be released from hospital without a safety notice in place. Therefore, they may commit some forms of family violence towards a victim-survivor without consequence, if their actions are not criminalised by other law.

The victim-survivor may then be at increased risk of family violence and the perpetrator could avoid accountability. Several officers indicated there have been instances in which perpetrators have been released into the community without an order in place, making this a real risk to victim-survivors.

Learning to balance the risks

Some police stations are developing processes to change the way they address perpetrator suicide threats. One of the participants suggested family violence safety notices should be issued first, before hospitalising a perpetrator.

Improvements within policing could prevent further violence from occurring. A nuanced approach is needed to train police to balance the mental health needs of perpetrators, as well as the safety of victim-survivors and the community at large.

However, the gap in service provision cannot be addressed by police alone.

There is limited information exchange between hospitals and police in some circumstances. We need further communication and collaboration to ensure police can issue safety notices when needed.

Regardless of whether a suicide threat is because of mental health issues, they can be weaponised by perpetrators of family violence. Change is needed to ensure victim-survivors are protected and perpetrators are held accountable.

It is important we continue to research and learn about how family violence and mental health interact, for both perpetrators and victim-survivors. As a result, we can more effectively move towards ending family violence.

Jessica Woolley 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Suicide threats are a weapon of family violence. How can police balance mental health needs with protecting victims? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231594

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Baker, Professor of Public Health, University of Otago

The international community’s recent failure to conclude a global pandemic agreement leaves large gaps in our capacity to deal with the next major infectious disease emergency.

The risk of another pandemic like COVID – the worst in a century – is increasing.

The World Health Organization (WHO) took an important step by adopting useful revisions to the existing legally-binding International Health Regulations.

But while this advance is something to celebrate, it is not enough. Even if governments approve the revised regulations, our best chance of preventing history repeating itself lies in a pandemic agreement.

Global responses to health hazards that cross borders date back to an international sanitary conference in 1851 which focused on measures to limit the spread of cholera. Since then, several initiatives have aimed to improve global health security, including the formation of the WHO itself in 1946.

The International Health Regulations of 2005 were a major step in this evolution. They ushered in the modern era of risk assessment and created a global surveillance system for public health emergencies of international concern.

Nonetheless, it was soon evident the new tools were limited in dealing with the increasingly complex and fast moving threat of zoonotic diseases (when an animal pathogen “spills over” to infect people).

Key changes to the International Health Regulations

Earlier this month, the 194 members of the WHO World Health Assembly passed by consensus several important amendments to the International Health Regulations, including:

• adding a definition of a “pandemic emergency” to emphasise the importance of such events within the broader category of public health emergencies of international concern

• increasing the focus on prevention with specific mention of “preparedness”

• strengthening equitable access to medical products and finance, with specific mention of “equity and solidarity”, and a dedicated “coordinating financial mechanism”

• requiring each state to establish a “national authority” to improve the implementation of the international health regulations within and among countries

• requiring countries to build a core capacity for “risk communication including addressing misinformation and disinformation”

• and modifying the “decision instrument” to enhance the detection of emerging respiratory infections with high pandemic potential.

The proposals that didn’t make it

Not all proposed amendment were achieved. Some commentators had advocated to incorporate the experience of countries in the Asia-Pacific region that used an elimination strategy to delay the spread of COVID, giving time to roll out vaccines and other interventions.

Such measures protected both high-income islands (Aotearoa New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan) as well as low and middle-income countries in continental Asia (Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Mongolia).

These nations generally achieved lower excess mortality than countries where the pandemic was less controlled. Similarly, the concept of elimination at source (sometimes called containment) wasn’t included in this revision.

A range of other potential improvements also failed to make it into the final text. These included an emphasis on preventing zoonotic spillovers from animals, enhanced sharing of scientific data and specimens, and strengthened accountability.

All WHO member states now have 18 months to consider the proposed revisions. They may enter reservations to parts they disagree with, even though this may weaken the coherence of the proposed amendments.

Why we need greater global cooperation

A pandemic agreement could address the many needed reforms that go beyond the International Health Regulations.

But the negotiations to reach global agreement are proving contentious. There have been deep divisions between rich and poorer countries over the sharing and affordable pricing of vaccines, treatments and diagnostics for developing states. The sharing of pathogen data has also proven problematic.

The negotiations have been further undermined by completely unfounded assertions that the WHO will be given power to impose restrictive measures such as lockdowns and vaccine mandates. It is not clear whether New Zealand’s changed negotiating position to focus more on national sovereignty influenced these discussions.

Due to these challenges, the international community has not yet agreed on a text for a pandemic agreement. The WHO has announced the next steps for further negotiations, which are already years past their start date.

From the threats of war to environmental devastation and pandemics, no country can unilaterally protect its citizens from the gravest shared threats to humanity. But while the need for global solidarity and cooperation is greater than ever, support for many of the key areas of international law is failing.

We owe it to the memory of the more than 27 million people estimated to have died so far from COVID, and the rising threats to future generations, to do the best we can to achieve a safer and more secure world.

The University of Otago receives funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand, the New Zealand Ministry of Health, and Te Niwha to support some of Michael Baker’s research on COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

Alexander Gillespie 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Despite improved WHO regulations, the world remains ill-prepared for the next pandemic – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231586

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Weigand, Professor of Architecture and Interior Design and Interim Dean, College of Creative Arts, Miami University

It took a global pandemic to convince American businesses that their employees could work productively from home, or a favorite coffee shop. Post-COVID-19, employers are struggling to find the right balance of in-office and remote work. However, hybrid work is likely here to stay, at least for a segment of workers.

This shift isn’t just changing lifestyles – it’s also affecting commercial spaces. Office vacancy rates post-COVID-19 shot up almost overnight, and they remain near 20% nationwide, the highest rate since 1979 as tenants downsize in place or relocate. This workspace surplus is putting pressure on existing development loans and leading to defaults or creative refinancing in a market already plagued by higher interest rates.

Office tenants with deeper pockets have gravitated to newer and larger buildings with more amenities, often referred to as Class A or “trophy” buildings. Older Class B and C buildings, which often have fewer amenities or less-desirable locations, have struggled to fill space.

High vacancy rates are forcing developers to get creative. With reduced demand for older buildings, along with housing shortages in many American cities, some downtown buildings are being converted to residential use.

These projects often include some percentage of affordable housing, underwritten by tax incentives. In October 2023, the Biden administration released a list of federal loan, grant, tax credit and technical assistance programs that can support commercial-to-residential conversions.

As an architect, I’m encouraged to see these renovations of older commercial buildings, which are more economical and sustainable than new construction. In my view, they are fundamentally changing the character of our cities for the better. Even though only about 20% to 30% of older buildings can be profitably converted, architects and developers are quickly learning how to grade these structures to identify good candidates.

From workplace to living space

Converting commercial buildings to apartments didn’t start with the pandemic. In the decade leading up to the outbreak of COVID-19, developers converted more than 110,000 apartments from outdated hotels, office buildings, factories, warehouses and other buildings across the U.S. According to industry data, more than 58,000 apartments are currently being converted from office buildings.

Several characteristics of older Class B and C buildings make conversion particularly attractive. These buildings typically have smaller floor plates – total square footage of space per floor. Importantly, they also have shorter “core-to-shell” distances – the distance from the building core that contains stairs and elevators to the window wall.

Residential building codes generally require that natural light reach most rooms. Since living spaces, bedrooms and bathrooms are often separated by walls, a smaller core-to-shell distance allows more rooms to access natural light, making the conversion easier.

In contrast, typical new office buildings have larger floor plates and core-to-shell distances that sometimes can exceed 50 feet. This makes them more difficult to convert to residences.

But it’s not impossible. One creative solution involves moving the window wall inward by several feet to create outdoor decks. That’s an appealing amenity, but also an extra cost. In some conversions where the core-to-shell depth is greater than needed, developers have added interior vertical shafts or window wells to bring daylight to interior spaces.

Many older commercial buildings also offer higher ceilings, which are especially desirable in the residential market. Apartments and condos typically don’t need to conceal mechanical and electrical services with suspended acoustic tile ceilings, as offices do, so they can provide 12 feet or more of clear ceiling height.

Some older buildings, including many made of brick or stone, have large windows, which also are desirable in residential use. Conversely, smaller windows or higher sill heights may be disincentives to conversion.

Many older buildings were constructed before air conditioning was widely available, so they have operable windows. This is yet another plus for residential conversion, since occupants typically desire natural ventilation in their dwelling unit.

Obstacles to conversion

Some characteristics of older buildings can make residential conversion more difficult. For example, location always matters. Buildings that are far from other amenities, such as restaurants or grocery stores, may be less desirable.

Buildings with more unusual floor plates or geometric forms that work for office use may be difficult to carve up into residential units. Older structures that contain asbestos or lead paint can require expensive remediation.

Zoning laws may bar residential use or otherwise limit what can be done with a building. Cities can play an important role in encouraging residential conversions by revisiting zoning codes or offering tax incentives to developers.

One of the biggest costs of a residential conversion is the need to replace building systems such as plumbing and heating. Plumbing requirements in commercial office spaces, for example, are largely met with restroom facilities in the building core. Apartments or condos each require their own bathroom and kitchen, adding significant cost.

A return to ‘walkable cities’

Despite these challenges, if residential conversions bring people and energy back to downtowns outside of the workday, stores, restaurants, entertainment and other amenities of a vibrant lifestyle will follow.

Architects, planners, developers and politicians are increasingly interested in “walkable cities” or “20-minute cities.” Both of these concepts allude to providing necessary amenities like grocery stores, schools and restaurants that are accessible to residents on foot, reducing the need to own a car and promoting a more sustainable lifestyle.

Walkable cities aren’t a new idea. Throughout the 19th century, people in U.S. cities like New York and Chicago lived, worked, shopped and socialized within mixed-use neighborhoods.

The growth of car ownership post-World War II separated these uses into residential suburbs, office parks, shopping malls and cineplexes. Many critics view suburbanization as a failed experiment that has promoted sprawling development, reliance on cars and economic inequality

As more downtown office buildings are converted to residential use, many of them are likely to house restaurants, day care facilities, grocery stores and other service businesses, typically on their ground floors. These amenities contribute to the financial success of a project and to the vibrant lifestyles of its residents.

All of these shifts prompt questions. Can architects and developers find ways to design buildings that serve multiple uses over several centuries, rather than a single targeted use that becomes obsolete in 100 years? Can mid- and high-rise buildings be envisioned as flexible structural grids, with lower-cost and easily changeable modular inserts? Such structures could accommodate ever-changing needs, some of which we may not yet know will be critical to the urban infrastructure.

Architects, planners and developers are beginning to explore these questions. Converting downtown offices to residential use could be just the starting point. And it’s a reminder that dynamic cities can reinvent themselves in response to challenges.

John Weigand 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Cities with empty commercial space and housing shortages are converting office buildings into apartments – here’s what they’re learning – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/226459

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

In his assault this week on the Albanese government’s climate policy, Peter Dutton is taking the Liberals right back to Tony Abbott’s days.

It’s a bold, risky big-target strategy, characterised by a truck load of negativity, as well as laced with a dash of policy adventurism.

Former chief scientist Ian Lowe, in an article in the Guardian, declared, “Given community attitudes, it looks like the silliest political death wish in recent history”.

But some in Labor quickly identified it as a Dutton “two-stage” strategy. Run hard at the suburban seats, where people are heavily under the financial pump. Abandon the teal seats for the moment. Try to force Anthony Albanese into minority government. Then hope in the next term to exploit whatever instability might arise.

That was the path that took Abbott – like Dutton, an unlikely Liberal leader – to government. Of course Dutton would have to hang onto the leadership through a second term in opposition (made a bit easier by not having Josh Frydenberg around).

Dutton’s climate strategy relies on tapping into two major current grievances: the cost-of-living pain and the resistance in many communities to the rollout of renewable energy infrastructure.

As opposition leader, Abbott labelled Labor’s carbon pollution reduction scheme as a “great big new tax on everything”.

Dutton has an update on an old theme, attacking the Albanese government’s 43% 2030 emissions reduction target – Australia’s pledge under the Paris climate agreement – as set to “destroy the economy”.

Abbott’s campaign yielded a political return for him, at a substantial cost for energy policy in Australia. But times have moved on in this never-ending climate debate, and Dutton’s climate policy-walk is through quicksand.

A pointed question was asked this week, at an Albanese news conference. Given cost of living was the top issue for people, did Australians want another election fought on climate change?

Probably not. To bring off his gamble, Dutton will need to convince voters Australia’s climate targets are harming them via their energy bills. Moreover, he’ll need to persuade them the energy transition can be safely slowed, and that nuclear power is credible and desirable.

That’s a big selling task. And so far, the opposition has embarked on it with extraordinary sloppiness.

Months ago, it flagged it would release its nuclear power policy before the budget. Then that was put off.

Initially, its nuclear option focused on small modular reactors. Then it switched to larger reactors, to be located on or near coal-fired power stations as they retire.

In an interview with last weekend’s Australian newspaper Dutton declared the 2030 target was unachievable. But he did not indicate whether a Coalition government would stay in the Paris agreement. Shadow Energy Minister Ted O’Brien had to clean up, saying a Dutton government would not seek to exit Paris.

Such untidiness is a feature of the Dutton opposition, typically opening it to attack by its opponents and leaving the public confused.

Political research will sit behind Dutton’s lines. When we look at the public research, the recently-released Lowy Institute 2024 poll shows a complex picture.

In that poll, 57% said global warming was a serious and pressing problem about which “we should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant costs”. Only 30% said the problem should be addressed “but its effects will be gradual so we can deal with the problem gradually by taking steps that are low in cost”.

There were age and political differences. The young are more galvanised than the old by the warming
threat, as are Labor supporters compared to Coalition supporters.

Beyond the generalised attitudes, the trends on the related issue of energy are very relevant. Some 48% say reducing household energy bills should be the main priority for the government’s energy policy. This is a 16 point increase from 2021. Those who say reducing carbon emissions should be the main priority have fallen 18 points to 37%.

The results show how altered circumstances over time do change people’s priorities (and of course these can change back).

The Dutton strategy is a back-end loaded policy, with less effort now (kicking much of the problem into the long grass) and relying on nuclear power after 2040 for a sprint to net zero 2050, a target Dutton says the Coalition still supports. Progress to 2050 doesn’t have to be linear, he says.

The government’s argument is that the energy transition, albeit difficult, is urgent and progress must be cumulative; trashing our 2030 target will undermine both investor confidence and Australia’s international reputation.

Dutton says he won’t announce what targets a Coalition government would have until after the election. Clearly such targets, if they ever materialised, would be less than Labor’s.

This position would lose the Coalition some votes. Dutton would be relying on other voters not being too fussed about his lack of targets. That would allow him to concentrate on attacking not just the government’s current 2030 target but the 2035 target it has to lodge under the Paris agreement early next year.

The government is potentially more vulnerable in the debate over the 2035 target than in the current row over the 2030 one.

The Climate Change Authority makes a recommendation by October to Energy Minister Chris Bowen on what the 2035 target should be. In its discussion paper, the authority has floated a range of 65–75% emissions reduction on 2005 levels. The authority believes this “could be achievable and sustainable if additional action is taken by governments, business, investors and households to achieve it”.

That would be a substantial lift in ambition from the 2030 target of 43% reduction, especially given there is dispute about whether that can be reached.

The government doesn’t have to accept the authority’s recommendation if it decided it was too high. But if it rejected it, it would open itself to an onslaught from the Greens.

As for the Greens, they are saying if a Dutton government tried to backtrack on the current 2030 target, it would breach the legislation the Albanese government passed to enshrine the target. (That could open a Coalition government to legal action, assuming it could not repeal the legislation.)

In practice, despite what Dutton says about returning to government in one term, under a two-term strategy he would not anticipate having to face that problem any time soon. The early herculean challenge Dutton does face is selling nuclear power to voters.

Michelle Grattan 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Grattan on Friday: the spectre of Abbott looms behind Dutton’s climate strategy – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-the-spectre-of-abbott-looms-behind-duttons-climate-strategy-232380

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

In his assault this week on the Albanese government’s climate policy, Peter Dutton is taking the Liberals right back to Tony Abbott’s days.

It’s a bold, risky big-target strategy, characterised by a truck load of negativity, as well as laced with a dash of policy adventurism.

Former chief scientist Ian Lowe, in an article in the Guardian, declared, “Given community attitudes, it looks like the silliest political death wish in recent history”.

But some in Labor quickly identified it as a Dutton “two-stage” strategy. Run hard at the suburban seats, where people are heavily under the financial pump. Abandon the teal seats for the moment. Try to force Anthony Albanese into minority government. Then hope in the next term to exploit whatever instability might arise.

That was the path that took Abbott – like Dutton, an unlikely Liberal leader – to government. Of course Dutton would have to hang onto the leadership through a second term in opposition (made a bit easier by not having Josh Frydenberg around).

Dutton’s climate strategy relies on tapping into two major current grievances: the cost-of-living pain and the resistance in many communities to the rollout of renewable energy infrastructure.

As opposition leader, Abbott labelled Labor’s carbon pollution reduction scheme as a “great big new tax on everything”.

Dutton has an update on an old theme, attacking the Albanese government’s 43% 2030 emissions reduction target – Australia’s pledge under the Paris climate agreement – as set to “destroy the economy”.

Abbott’s campaign yielded a political return for him, at a substantial cost for energy policy in Australia. But times have moved on in this never-ending climate debate, and Dutton’s climate policy-walk is through quicksand.

A pointed question was asked this week, at an Albanese news conference. Given cost of living was the top issue for people, did Australians want another election fought on climate change?

Probably not. To bring off his gamble, Dutton will need to convince voters Australia’s climate targets are harming them via their energy bills. Moreover, he’ll need to persuade them the energy transition can be safely slowed, and that nuclear power is credible and desirable.

That’s a big selling task. And so far, the opposition has embarked on it with extraordinary sloppiness.

Months ago, it flagged it would release its nuclear power policy before the budget. Then that was put off.

Initially, its nuclear option focused on small modular reactors. Then it switched to larger reactors, to be located on or near coal-fired power stations as they retire.

In an interview with last weekend’s Australian newspaper Dutton declared the 2030 target was unachievable. But he did not indicate whether a Coalition government would stay in the Paris agreement. Shadow Energy Minister Ted O’Brien had to clean up, saying a Dutton government would not seek to exit Paris.

Such untidiness is a feature of the Dutton opposition, typically opening it to attack by its opponents and leaving the public confused.

Political research will sit behind Dutton’s lines. When we look at the public research, the recently-released Lowy Institute 2024 poll shows a complex picture.

In that poll, 57% said global warming was a serious and pressing problem about which “we should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant costs”. Only 30% said the problem should be addressed “but its effects will be gradual so we can deal with the problem gradually by taking steps that are low in cost”.

There were age and political differences. The young are more galvanised than the old by the warming
threat, as are Labor supporters compared to Coalition supporters.

Beyond the generalised attitudes, the trends on the related issue of energy are very relevant. Some 48% say reducing household energy bills should be the main priority for the government’s energy policy. This is a 16 point increase from 2021. Those who say reducing carbon emissions should be the main priority have fallen 18 points to 37%.

The results show how altered circumstances over time do change people’s priorities (and of course these can change back).

The Dutton strategy is a back-end loaded policy, with less effort now (kicking much of the problem into the long grass) and relying on nuclear power after 2040 for a sprint to net zero 2050, a target Dutton says the Coalition still supports. Progress to 2050 doesn’t have to be linear, he says.

The government’s argument is that the energy transition, albeit difficult, is urgent and progress must be cumulative; trashing our 2030 target will undermine both investor confidence and Australia’s international reputation.

Dutton says he won’t announce what targets a Coalition government would have until after the election. Clearly such targets, if they ever materialised, would be less than Labor’s.

This position would lose the Coalition some votes. Dutton would be relying on other voters not being too fussed about his lack of targets. That would allow him to concentrate on attacking not just the government’s current 2030 target but the 2035 target it has to lodge under the Paris agreement early next year.

The government is potentially more vulnerable in the debate over the 2035 target than in the current row over the 2030 one.

The Climate Change Authority makes a recommendation by October to Energy Minister Chris Bowen on what the 2035 target should be. In its discussion paper, the authority has floated a range of 65–75% emissions reduction on 2005 levels. The authority believes this “could be achievable and sustainable if additional action is taken by governments, business, investors and households to achieve it”.

That would be a substantial lift in ambition from the 2030 target of 43% reduction, especially given there is dispute about whether that can be reached.

The government doesn’t have to accept the authority’s recommendation if it decided it was too high. But if it rejected it, it would open itself to an onslaught from the Greens.

As for the Greens, they are saying if a Dutton government tried to backtrack on the current 2030 target, it would breach the legislation the Albanese government passed to enshrine the target. (That could open a Coalition government to legal action, assuming it could not repeal the legislation.)

In practice, despite what Dutton says about returning to government in one term, under a two-term strategy he would not anticipate having to face that problem any time soon. The early herculean challenge Dutton does face is selling nuclear power to voters.

Michelle Grattan 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Grattan on Friday: the spectre of Abbott looms behind Dutton’s energy strategy – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-the-spectre-of-abbott-looms-behind-duttons-energy-strategy-232380

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Danielle Udy, Research associate in Climatology, University of Tasmania

Australia has a long history of bushfires. The 2019-2020 Black Summer was the worst in recorded history. But was that the worst it could get?

Our new research has reconstructed the past 2,000 years of southeast Australia’s bushfire weather, drawing on evidence of past climates laid down in changing patterns in deep ice in East Antarctica. The high and low pressure weather systems south of Australia are so large they connect the two continents, even though they are more than 3,000 km apart.

These historic weather patterns are recorded in the ice. Not with ash which might first come to mind, but in sea-salt spray from the Southern Ocean. When southeast Australia experiences extreme bushfire weather over summer, there is less wind around Antarctica, which means less sea-salt spray is laid down at the ice core site.

Buried in the ice is a warning. At least seven times over the last two millennia, our new research shows bushfire-prone southeast Australia has endured bushfire weather as bad or worse than what was experienced during the devastating Black Summer bushfires. The Black Summer bushfires burned through about 1.5 million hectares, or more than six times the size of the Australian Capital Territory.

This means natural climate variability can toss up more severe bushfire weather than we have yet seen. Given human-caused climate change is also loading the dice for worse and worse bushfire weather, it suggests we are underestimating how bad bushfires can be in Australia.

What makes bushfire weather?

If the weekend is forecast to be hot, dry and windy, we would say this is bushfire weather. Bushfire weather does not mean bushfires are inevitable, only they are more likely to start and more likely to be intense and fast-spreading once they ignite.

Australia’s Black Summer was caused by several climate factors combining. We had a multi-year drought, which coincided with climate variability bringing strong and hot northwesterly winds, and all against a backdrop of increasing heat and falling humidity over land brought by climate change.

Climate change is bringing more frequent and more severe bushfire weather. This trend is projected to continue into the future.

But quantifying the impacts of climate change on bushfire weather over the southeast Australian regions hardest hit by the Black Summer bushfires is difficult. This is because the climate in these mostly coastal or alpine regions varies a lot and we only have a relatively short record of observations.

Read more:
Antarctic ice shows Australia’s drought and flood risk is worse than thought

Our previous research on droughts – a key ingredient for extreme bushfire seasons – showed our roughly 120 years of rainfall observations does not fully cover the range of drought conditions which have occurred in the past 1,000 years. This is supported by recent palaeoclimate work reconstructing 2,000 years of eastern Australian climate variability and research using climate models to show evidence of megadroughts lasting 20 years or more in southeastern Australia.

Australia’s bushfire weather observations only extend back to 1950. In short, this means we have limited insights based on observations alone into how bad bushfire weather can be.

Answers in the ice

To reach back further in time, we looked to Antarctica. This is because Australia and Antarctica are linked through a “weather bridge”, meaning the enormous, powerful weather systems of the Southern Ocean affect both at the same time.

Year after year, these systems lift and carry different amounts of sea salt from the ocean surface and transport it to Antarctica, where it is laid down in layers of snow and ice.

About 125 km from Casey Station in Australia’s Antarctic territory lies Law Dome. This small, coastal ice cap is very useful for climate scientists, because it is regularly hit by cold cyclones from the Southern Ocean. These intense winds bring sea salt and trigger high snow accumulation – about 1.5 metres a year.

Drilling ice cores from places such as Law Dome has given us rich data sets of past climatic events. We have used these changing levels of sea salt in the ice to reconstruct rainfall and drought over two millennia in eastern Australia. Our new research focuses on Australia’s bushfire weather.

What did we find?

Using this evidence, we found an important relationship between the ice core record and the Forest Fire Danger Index, used by authorities to measure bushfire weather.

We then grouped similar weather patterns together over time, so we could get what we were really after: the connection between high and low pressure systems in the Southern Ocean, sea salt, and bushfire weather.

In the observational record, most of Australia’s bushfire disasters have been linked to intense summer cold fronts, including Ash Wednesday (1983), the Canberra bushfires (2003), Black Saturday (2009) and the Black Summer. These cold fronts direct hot, dry and intense winds from the Australian desert to the coast. This increases the chance of bushfires starting and can turn bushfires already burning into enormous conflagrations.

Using our ice core and weather datasets, we found the same weather conditions are behind periods of lower levels of sea salt in the ice and elevated bushfire weather in southeast Australia. These conditions are when the strong westerly winds circling Antarctica move north towards Australia, bringing summer cold fronts. In technical terms, this is when the Southern Annular Mode is negative.

In the last 2,000 years, we found seven years where bushfire weather was the same or even worse than the 2019-2020 Black Summer, in the summers of 485, 683, 709, 760, 862, 885 and 1108 CE.

Ice and bushfire

Climate change is making extreme bushfire weather steadily more likely.

What our research shows is that natural climate variability can also produce bushfire weather similar or worse than the Black Summer.

Fire authorities should take these possible natural extremes into account, in addition to the increasing intensity of bushfire weather from climate change.

Read more:
A 20-year ‘mega-drought’ in Australia? Research suggests it’s happened before – and we should expect it again

Danielle Udy receives funding from the Australian Research Council through the Australian Centre for Excellence in Antarctic Science and a Discovery Project

Anthony Kiem receives funding from (i) the Australian Research Council (ARC) through Discovery Projects and (ii) the Future Drought Fund via the Southern Queensland and Northern New South Wales Drought Resilience Adoption and Innovation Hub.

Neil Holbrook receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), through the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes and the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Weather of the 21st Century, and Australia’s National Environmental Science Program.

Nerilie Abram receives funding from the Australian Research Council through the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes, the Australian Centre for Excellence in Antarctic Science and the Centre of Excellence for the Weather of the 21st Century.

Tessa Vance receives funding from the Australian Research Council through Discovery Projects, and from the Australian Governments’ Antarctic Science Collaboration Initiative.

– ref. Of ice and fire: what sea salt in Antarctic snowfall reveals about bushfires worse than the Black Summer – https://theconversation.com/of-ice-and-fire-what-sea-salt-in-antarctic-snowfall-reveals-about-bushfires-worse-than-the-black-summer-230982

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jeff Borland, Professor of Economics, The University of Melbourne

For some time now – gradually, but nevertheless relentlessly – the Australian labour market has been weakening.

Today’s Bureau of Statistics employment report, telling us what happened in the month to May, show that direction is unchanged.

Certainly, employment growth of almost 40,000 in the month and a slight dip in the unemployment rate from 4.1% to 4% is good news.

Not only that, the labour market remains in a much better state than prior to COVID. You need to go back to the early 1970s to find another period of 30 consecutive months when the unemployment rate was below 4.5%.

And the employment-to-population ratio (the proportion of the population aged 15 and older that is employed) remains not too far off its all-time high at 64.1%. That’s a full two percentage points above where it was when COVID hit in early 2020.

Yet the labour market is weakening.

Not that it has always been easy to see. Take growth in employment. Since June last year, when the rate of unemployment began to rise, employment has increased at an annualised rate of 2.6%.

That rate is much faster than in any of the previous three episodes since 2000 when the rate of unemployment rose appreciably.

This resilience in employment has muted the rise in the rate of unemployment that would have otherwise occurred.

Okun’s law, named after US economist Arthur Okun, tells us how we ought to expect the unemployment rate to change for any given rate of economic growth.

Gross domestic product grew 1.1% in the year to March. Okun’s law says this should mean the unemployment rate climbed 0.9 of a percentage point. Instead, it climbed by only one-third as much, 0.3 of a percentage point.

More employed than might be expected

So, why has employment been growing faster than expected? There are several reasons.

One is rapid population growth. Population has grown at an annual rate of 2.9% since last June, more quickly than in previous times when unemployment rose.

More people means more demand for services and more demand for workers.

Another reason concerns job vacancies. During the recovery from COVID, the proportion of vacant jobs almost doubled, climbing to 3.1% in mid-2022 compared to just 1.6% prior to COVID.

Since then the vacancy rate has fallen back to 2.3%. This matters for employment. Drawing down on the stock of existing vacancies allows a larger number of extra workers to be employed.

And average work hours have fallen, from about 138.5 hours per month in June last year to 136 hours in May. With each worker doing fewer hours on average, the total hours of work can be divided among more workers.

Jobs growth heading down

Even with these special circumstances, the pace of employment growth is falling. In the past six months annualised employment growth has almost halved compared to the first six months of 2023. It’s decreased from 3.7% to 2%.

And other indicators show a more pronounced downward trend.

Annual growth in monthly hours worked averaged close to 7% in the first six months of 2023, but only 0.8% in the past six months.

Annual growth in the number of jobs reported to the Australian Tax Office payroll system over the same period fell from around 6% to 2%.

All this spells hard times ahead for the government and the Reserve Bank.

With the labour market bubbling along and the rate of unemployment hardly budging, there seemed to be little trade-off between pursuing an inflation-first policy and full employment.

That is no longer the case. The trade-off is becoming clear to see, and looming larger with every new release of data on the state of the labour market.

Jeff Borland receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Unemployment has dipped, but don’t be fooled – the jobs market is weakening – https://theconversation.com/unemployment-has-dipped-but-dont-be-fooled-the-jobs-market-is-weakening-231923

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Bill Shorten, the minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), is currently in New York at a United Nations conference on the rights of people with disabilities.

At the weekend, he’ll fly to Europe to represent Australia at a summit in Switzerland aimed at finding international consensus on a peace path for the Ukrainian conflict.

In this podcast, Shorten discusses these conferences, as well as the ongoing process of reforming the NDIS.

On what the Ukrainian peace conference hopes to achieve, given Russia will not be there, Shorten says

Well, at the absolute very least, it’s an expression of global solidarity for the Ukrainian struggle against the criminal invasion of Ukraine by Russia. But I think more than that it […] lays down markers across a range of issues, I expect, which would be part of the basis for a peace process.

The work has to be done, eventually it has to obviously involve Russia, but there’s work which needs to start now.

Read more:
With Russia not attending, what can this weekend’s Ukraine peace summit achieve?

Australia has given substantial aid to Ukraine but refused its request for retired Taipan helicopters and a shipment of coal. Shorten says:

Well, Ukraine is entitled to ask for whatever it wants, but Australia is entitled to provide whatever it thinks it should.

When it comes to the coal shipment, it’s not correct to say that nothing has happened. What happened is that we’re interested in delivering the most effective and efficient support we can for the Ukrainian people. Shipment of coal from Australia carries shipping and insurance costs. Instead, we’ve given the equivalent amount of the coal in cash – $20 million to the Ukraine Energy Support Fund.

Shorten currently has legislation going through parliament to reform the NDIS. The UN disabilities conference has been an opportunity to share information with other countries.

It is quite an amazing experience. The governments of the world talk about what they’re doing for people with disability, but it’s a sort of kitchen of everything for disability.

The nations say what they’re doing, the non-government organisations talk. There are many Australian civil society disability advocates who are here. We see what good ideas we can hoover up from the rest of the world, and we talk a bit about the Australian journey for disability.

NDIS reform involves a battle against fraud and what have been exploding costs. Shorten says:

I must state this at the outset because sometimes NDIS media coverage tends to be just all doom and gloom. The NDIS, since its inception 11 years ago, has changed hundreds of thousands of lives for the better and it’s attracted people to work in the sector. But it is correct that it’s growing too fast. And what we’ve got a range of measures to get the scheme back on track. This legislation specifically goes to some of them.

We want to make sure that when a person’s annual budget or their two-yearly budget is expended far quicker than the annual or the bi-annual plan predicted, then we’re able to look and understand why that is the case. We want to make sure that the person with a disability isn’t being manipulated into burning up their resources with bad advice or inappropriate services.

Finally, there’s been speculation about whether Shorten would be interested in an oversees post. Will he be around for the long haul? Asked if he’ll contest the next election, he says,

My plans haven’t changed at all. I am very lucky to be able to serve in the parliament. I’ve been very fortunate […] I’ve been lucky to lead the Labor Party, I’ve been lucky to work in NDIS and government services and be part of the royal commission class action. I don’t want to waste a minute of my time here.

Michelle Grattan 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Bill Shorten’s around-the-world trip to discuss peace in Ukraine and NDIS reform – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-bill-shortens-around-the-world-trip-to-discuss-peace-in-ukraine-and-ndis-reform-232381

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tracy Harkison, Associate Professor, School of Hospitality and Tourism, Auckland University of Technology

What should visiting Aotearoa New Zealand cost your average tourist? The government has suggested raising the price of admission – otherwise known as the international visitor conservation and tourism levy (IVL) – from NZ$35 to $100.

The aim is to relieve New Zealand taxpayers and ratepayers of some of the tourism costs they currently bear. But it also raises important questions about our overall tourism strategy, and about who we are encouraging to visit.

The previous Labour government introduced the IVL in 2019 to contribute to tourism infrastructure and conservation projects, as well as help create productive, sustainable and inclusive tourism growth.

At the same time, Tourism New Zealand has been actively campaigning to attract tourists who will visit more regions, travel in different seasons – and spend more.

So, do we want to focus on attracting high-spending tourists? Or do we want to attract large numbers of all tourist types and charge them more? The answers will have wide implications for whether New Zealand becomes a niche, premium destination, or another stop on the mass travel map.

Value versus values

Tourism is a vital part of New Zealand’s economy, earning about $17.5 billion a year (around $48 million a day) before COVID. The pandemic put the industry on life support, of course, but it did provide a unique opportunity to rethink and reshape tourism policy.

One strategy that emerged was to attract “high-value” tourists rather than revert to the pre-pandemic model of mass tourism. Some popular destinations had been overwhelmed at times. This put a strain on both environmental sustainability and the quality of visitor experiences.

This proposed shift was not unique to New Zealand. During the pandemic, many countries explored the potential of more sustainable and higher-value tourism once borders reopened.

But New Zealand’s distinctive overseas marketing approach has long played up being a welcoming country for all. This tension between being inclusive as well as more exclusive also challenges the Māori concept of manaakitanga – hospitality and generosity – that has been key to tourism’s messaging.

The strategy and insights team at the Department of Conservation suggested a way through the paradox: shift the narrative from high-value tourism to values-based tourism that “gives more than it takes”.

Meanwhile, Tourism New Zealand was collecting data to understand more about how to attract and satisfy high-net-worth individuals, already targeted through its premium partnerships programme.

At that time, the then tourism minister, Stuart Nash, was talking up a new vision “to target high-quality tourists”. He later clarified this, saying “quality” referred to people staying at least ten days and spending more money. He also wanted New Zealand to be one of the world’s top three “aspirational destinations”

Calls to reset tourism strategy

A Tourism New Zealand survey released just before last year’s election suggested Nash’s message may have resonated with some – 15% were in favour of attracting a “higher quality” of tourist, and 30% wanted to limit the number of tourists on public land.

With tourism now approaching pre-COVID numbers and international visitor spending up $1.3 billion on the previous year, the question of how many and what kind of tourists we want becomes more urgent.

To that end, the business association Tourism Industry Aotearoa has released Tourism 2050: A Blueprint For Impact. It aims to “reset industry strategy” and calls for a national tourism policy statement from the government.

Among the blueprint’s ten recommended main actions, environmental sustainability and embracing Māori culture and knowledge stand out. This includes embedding the
Tiaki Promise, an industry initiative begun in 2018 to encourage tourists to care for New Zealand’s people, places and culture.

Finding the balance

With international visitor spending up 18% up on pre-COVID levels, Tourism New Zealand has been optimistic its strategy is paying off. But any increase in the international visitor levy will need to be communicated carefully.

While $100 may not seem a lot in the context of an overseas holiday’s overall cost, it is still another price barrier. And openly targeting high-value visitors suggests other visitors are low-value.

If the essence of manaakitanga is that people arrive as strangers but leave as whānau (family), the authenticity of New Zealand’s overall messaging needs to be clear.

It’s true that luxury travel is a growth market. But showcasing a commitment to the environment and Indigenous culture can appeal as much to a backpacker as to a high-net-worth individual.

Engaging local communities in tourism planning will be crucial to ensure the benefits are shared widely, and the whole country can show that manaakitanga. Fostering a more sustainable tourism industry means looking after everyone.

The success of the strategy lies in our ability to balance exclusivity with inclusivity: encourage all types of tourists, don’t raise the visitor levy by too much, and ensure New Zealand stays a welcoming and sustainable haven for all.

Tracy Harkison 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Welcome to NZ – now pay up: the risks and rewards of raising the foreign tourist tax – https://theconversation.com/welcome-to-nz-now-pay-up-the-risks-and-rewards-of-raising-the-foreign-tourist-tax-232138

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Parisa Ziaesaeidi, Associate Lecturer in Architecture, Western Sydney University

The National Cabinet set an ambitious target of building 1.2 million well-located homes over the next five years to tackle Australia’s housing crisis. The focus of the National Housing Accord is on complementary development that improves existing neighbourhoods. This includes infill development on vacant or underutilised land in established urban areas.

Infill development uses existing infrastructure and avoids urban sprawl. It can create more compact neighbourhoods with diverse housing choices.

Well planned and designed infill development makes it easier for residents to use public transport and active transport such as cycling and walking. It also reduces the loss of native vegetation and farmland. It’s generally a win for the environment, people and the public purse.

The question is how can Australia achieve its housing target? The current rate of construction is too slow to deliver 1.2 million homes by July 2029. And can we do so in a way that meets people’s needs and preference for medium-density housing rather than ultra-dense high rises?

The answer is to build so-called “missing middle” housing types such as low-rise apartments, townhouses and duplexes. Prefabricated construction can deliver this sort of housing much more quickly.

Federal Industry Ministry Ed Husic, who is hosting a roundtable today on the role prefabricated housing can play in achieving the target, said:

We know that this gives us a great opportunity to use advanced technology to build these homes. Prefabs have come a long way from what people used to associate them with and they’re providing really quality solutions.

The missing middle: a crucial component

Development in Australia tends to gravitate toward either low-density urban sprawl or ultra-dense, high-rise development. While medium-density development exists, it’s missing from the housing mix in many areas.

Missing middle housing fills the gap between large family houses and high-rise apartments. It’s an important step toward supplying enough well-located housing in our cities.

Low-rise apartments, townhouses and duplexes can help Australian cities grow through inside-out, medium-density development. Cities then won’t have to spread out to house growing populations.

The missing middle may be more affordable for residents such as young professionals, small families and seniors. Building this housing in established neighbourhoods will, in turn, improve their social mix.

Prefab offers speed and affordable quality

Prefabricated housing can be important for delivering this missing middle. By making construction more efficient, it can produce more affordable homes. And reducing waste makes the homes more sustainable.

Precise manufacturing in controlled factory conditions means prefab homes can be more consistently high quality than those built on site. And they can be built in weeks rather than months.

Off-site production also reduces construction activities on the housing site. There’s less noise, traffic and nuisance for neighbours.

This is good for urban areas where housing demand is high and solutions are urgently needed.

Yet only about 5% of new housing is prefabricated in Australia. In contrast, 84% of new houses in Sweden use prefabricated elements.

A proven approach overseas

Experience overseas shows how medium-density prefab can deliver more housing that’s accepted by the community.

A shining example is the Stanley 1351 in Los Angeles, California. It’s an innovative development in an area where space is limited and neighbourhood disturbances must be minimised. It uses prefabricated modules to construct medium-density housing.

The result is a dynamic urban centre with a wide choice of housing types. Its thoughtful design and quality construction enhance the community. The development also minimises carbon emissions.

This approach needs policy support

To realise the goals of the National Housing Accord, governments and everyone else involved in housing construction must work together to develop comprehensive policies. This policy framework should enable the use of emerging construction technologies such as prefab and modular housing.

Moving beyond the prefab stigma requires a multi-pronged approach. Projects will have to be designed, built, financed and executed to have a permanent, high-quality look and feel. They should fit right into the streetscape.

Stanley 1351 demonstrates how prefab construction can do this. The new homes are integrated with the surrounding architecture, making them more welcoming to residents.

As Ed Husic acknowledges, public doubts about the long-term viability of prefabs must also be overcome. Certification of compliance with building codes and standards is a way to ensure structural integrity, durability and safety.

The crucial goal of increasing the supply of homes depends on integrated strategic planning that encourages innovative and efficient methods to achieve good outcomes. This means creating vibrant, sustainable and desirable communities that meet diverse housing needs.

Strategic and participatory planning done well can help uphold people’s fundamental right to housing. Planning that encourages the demonstration and widespread adoption of prefab and modular methods can play an important role in achieving these housing goals for Australians.

Parisa Ziaesaeidi 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Prefabs and the ‘missing middle’: how to get Australia back on track to build 1.2 million homes in the next 5 years – https://theconversation.com/prefabs-and-the-missing-middle-how-to-get-australia-back-on-track-to-build-1-2-million-homes-in-the-next-5-years-231373

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stijn Glorie, Associate Professor of Geology, University of Adelaide

In parts of South Australia, long stretches of beach are often blanketed in large patches of pink sand. Strong swells can dump drifts of reddish grains of garnet along the shore – but the origin of these colourful crystals has until now been a mystery.

Garnet is rare in beach sand, as it is destroyed by prolonged exposure to the waves and currents of the ocean. If we find large amounts of garnet in beach sand, it means there must be a local source of garnet-bearing rock. But where is this rock?

The hunt for the source of South Australia’s pink sand took us thousands of kilometres and half a billion years back in time, to a previously undiscovered mountain range we believe is now buried deep beneath the Antarctic ice sheet. Our new study is published in Communications Earth & Environment.

A local source?

Geologists get excited when we find garnet in beach sand or other sediments, because these minerals grow deep in Earth’s crust, in the same kind of conditions in which diamonds are formed.

One way diamonds or garnets can reach the surface is via carrot-shaped volcanic structures called kimberlite pipes. There are kimberlites (and diamonds) to be found in South Australia – at Eurelia, for example. However, these deposits are far from the coast, are not very abundant, and are only around 170–190 million years old – so they are unlikely to be the source of our beach garnets.

Another way garnet can reach the surface is via prolonged erosion.

Garnet typically forms in greater volumes in places where the crust is thick, such as under mountains. As the mountains erode, the garnet may be revealed as a record of the former mountain belt.

So another possible origin for the beach garnets is the erosion of the Adelaide Fold Belt. This mountain belt, which stretched north from Adelaide for hundreds of kilometres, developed between 514 million and 490 million years ago.

A third possible source is the Gawler Craton, a huge slab of ancient rock beneath South Australia with outcrops in the Adelaide Fold Belt. The Gawler Craton contains plenty of garnet, which formed in several episodes between 3.3 billion and 1.4 billion years ago.

To find the source of our beach sand garnets, we set out to find their ages. Very old garnets could be from the Gawler Craton, while younger ones would have the Adelaide Fold Belt as a more likely origin.

A timing mismatch

We analysed several hundred grains of coastal garnet, and found the majority of them formed around 590 million years ago. Far from answering our questions, this result only raised more.

The beach sand garnets were far too young to have come from the Gawler Craton, but too old to have come from the eroding Adelaide Fold Belt. In fact, this time around 590 million years ago is thought to have been a tectonically quiet period in the region, where we would not expect garnet to grow.

Our dating results effectively ruled out a local source for the garnets. So what was left?

Long-distance travellers

If the garnets did not come from a local source, we can say two things about them. First, they must have travelled in a way that would not grind them to smithereens. Second, they must have been stored locally in a protected environment before finding their way onto the beaches.

A possible solution that meets both these criteria can be found at Hallet Cove Conservation Park, located on the South Australian coast around 20 kilometres south of Adelaide.

Here we find exposed sedimentary rocks that were formed around 280 million years ago, during a very icy phase of Earth’s history. The ice is important, because glaciers and icebergs can transport large volumes of rock over long distances without damaging their internal structure.

Furthermore, garnets found in glacial sediments on Kangaroo Island, which were deposited around the same time as the Hallet Cove sediments, were dated to around 590 million years as well. The garnets were not born in these deposits, but were transported into them by ice flow.

A former land bridge

So, if the beach garnets were stored in sedimentary glacial deposits along the South Australian coast since the Late Palaeozoic Ice Age, before being washed onto the shore, where did they come from originally?

During the Late Palaeozoic Ice Age around 280 million years ago, Australia was connected to Antarctica in a large landmass called Gondwana, covered by a massive ice sheet.

Reconstructions of ice flow at this time suggest glaciers would have brought ice northwest from what are now the Transantarctic Mountains in East Antarctica.

The Transantarctic Mountains are the expression of an older mountain belt, the Ross Orogen, which started developing around 550 million years ago but was not experiencing any peak garnet-forming conditions until around 520 million years ago – 60 million years after the garnet in the pink sands. So we are getting warmer, but the Transantarctic Mountains are not a suitable source either.

A hidden treasure

There is one outcrop of rock in East Antarctica where garnets of the right age have been found, near the Skelton Glacier in Southern Victoria Land. However, such a small outcrop could not have produced the large volume of garnet we see on Australian shores.

This outcrop sits at the edge of a colossal area of some 2 million square kilometres buried beneath a thick ice sheet. We postulate that this area contains abundant garnet that grew in an unknown mountain belt around 590 million years ago.

It is currently not possible to sample the rock under this ice sheet to confirm our theory. But it is conceivable that millions of years of ice transport eroded the bedrock beneath, and transported the ground-up rock – including garnets – northeastwards towards the area that has now split into the coastlines of Antarctica and Australia.

The transported rock was then delivered to the South Australian coast some 280 million years ago and stored in sedimentary deposits such as Hallet Cove. Here it sat undisturbed until erosion eventually released the garnets into the sea – and then, finally, onto South Australia’s beaches.

Stijn Glorie receives funding from the Australian Research Council (FT210100906)

Jack Mulder and Sharmaine Verhaert do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. South Australia’s enigmatic pink sand was born in ice-covered Antarctic mountains, new research shows – https://theconversation.com/south-australias-enigmatic-pink-sand-was-born-in-ice-covered-antarctic-mountains-new-research-shows-230781

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Eldridge, Senior Lecturer in Chemistry, Swinburne University of Technology

Spicy foods taste spicy because they contain a family of compounds called capsaicinoids. Capsaicin is the major culprit. It’s found in chillies, jalapeños, cayenne pepper, and is even the active ingredient in pepper spray.

Capsaicin doesn’t actually physically heat up your mouth. The burning sensation comes from receptors in the mouth reacting to capsaicin and sending a signal to the brain that something is very hot.

That’s why the “hot” chilli sensation feels so real – we even respond by sweating. To alleviate the heat, you need to remove the capsaicin from your mouth.

So why doesn’t drinking water help make that spicy feeling go away? And what would work better instead?

Water-loving and water-hating molecules

To help us choose what might wash the capsaicin away most effectively, it’s helpful to know that capsaicin is a hydrophobic molecule. That means it hates being in contact with water and will not easily mix with it.

Look what happens when you try to mix hydrophobic sand with water.

On the other hand, hydrophilic molecules love water and are very happy to mix with it.

You’ve likely seen this before. You can easily dissolve hydrophilic sugar in water, but it’s hard to wash away hydrophobic oils from your pan using tap water alone.

If you try to wash hydrophobic capsaicin away with water, it won’t be very effective, because hydrophilic and hydrophobic substances don’t mix.

Going for iced water will be even less effective, as hydrophobic capsaicin is even less soluble in water at lower temperatures. You may get a temporary sense of relief while the cold liquid is in your mouth, but as soon as you swallow it, you’ll be back where you started.

Instead, a good choice would be to consume something that is also hydrophobic. This is because of an old-but-true adage in chemistry that “like dissolves like”.

The idea is that generally, hydrophobic substances will not dissolve in something hydrophilic – like water – but will dissolve in something that is also hydrophobic, as this video shows:

My mouth is on fire. What should I drink instead of water?

A swig of oil would likely be effective, but is perhaps not so palatable.

Milk makes for an ideal choice for two reasons.

The first is that milk contains hydrophobic fats, which the capsaicin will more easily dissolve in, allowing it to be washed away.

The second is that dairy products contain a protein called casein. Casein is an emulsifier, a substance that helps oils and water mix, as in this video:

Casein plays a large role in keeping the fat mixed throughout your glass of milk, and it also has a strong affinity for capsaicin. It will readily wrap up and encapsulate capsaicin molecules and assist in carrying them away from the receptor. This relieves the burning sensation.

OK but I hate drinking milk. What else can I try?

What about raita? This dish, commonly served with Indian curries, is made primarily from yoghurt. So aside from being its own culinary experience, raita is rich in fats, and therefore contains plenty of hydrophobic material. It also contains casein, which will again help lock up and remove the capsaicin.

Ice cream would also work, as it contains both casein and large amounts of hydrophobic substances.

Some studies have also shown that consuming drinks with large amounts of sugar can relieve spiciness.

What about reaching for that ice cold beer?

This is commonly suggested as a suitable approach to stop the burning. At first glance, this may seem a good idea because capsaicin is highly soluble in alcohol.

However, most beers only contain between 4–6% alcohol. The bulk of the liquid in beer is water, which is hydrophilic and cannot wash away capsaicin. The small amount of alcohol in your beer would make it slightly more effective, but not to any great degree.

Your curry and beer may taste great together, but that’s likely the only benefit.

In truth, an alcoholic beverage is not going to help much unless you go for something with a much, much higher alcohol content, which comes with its own problems.

Daniel Eldridge 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Why doesn’t water help with spicy food? What about milk or beer? – https://theconversation.com/why-doesnt-water-help-with-spicy-food-what-about-milk-or-beer-226624

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin Isakhan, Professor of International Politics, Deakin University

War brings not just unimaginable human suffering, but also the destruction of significant heritage sites.

Israel’s bombardment of Gaza reportedly wrecked the once-majestic Great Omari Mosque late last year. A Russian attack reportedly did significant damage to the Church of the Holy Mother of God in Ukraine. Recent wars in places like Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria have also destroyed other important heritage sites.

We were interested by how locals in conflict zones felt heritage sites should be rebuilt after wars end, and who should do it.

To find out more, we surveyed 1,600 residents in the Syrian city of Aleppo about heritage restoration projects in their city. Aleppo saw untold amounts of human and heritage devastation during a conflict that spanned the years 2012–16.

Our research, published in the International Journal of Heritage Studies, identified four key themes:

• locals don’t want heritage reconstruction to be privileged over security

• they want local religious sites rebuilt as much as significant non-religious sites

• they want heritage sites transformed into more useful structures for the community

• and they want control and agency over the future of their own heritage.

Our findings aren’t only important for Syria. They also hold important clues about how we might approach heritage restoration projects in other post-conflict sites.

Foreign-led restoration efforts

Aleppo was among the most dangerous frontlines in the Syrian war. Rebels and Islamists battled Syrian armed forces for control of the city.

UNESCO has estimated that 60% of the Old City of Aleppo was severely damaged, and about 30% completely destroyed.

After the war concluded, the international community launched various initiatives to protect and reconstruct the heritage of Aleppo.

One prominent example is UNESCO’s ambitious Emergency Safeguarding of Syrian Cultural Heritage program, largely funded by the European Union.

The Aga Khan Trust for Culture (a group that works to preserve and revitalise cultural assets) and the United Nations Development Programme also led programs seeking to restore historic markets across the Old City, in an effort to stimulate economic activity.

Other projects have been funded by Western governments. The US State Department, the British Council and the German Foreign Office have all funded various heritage restoration efforts in Syria.

Key allies of the Syrian government, such as Russia, have also sought to reconstruct heritage sites across Aleppo. Iran, too, has said it’s willing to be involved in such projects in future.

However, little was known about how the people of Aleppo felt about these foreign-led heritage restoration efforts.

For our study, we collaborated with scholars from the Arab Barometer (a nonpartisan research network which surveys citizens in the Arab world).

Is heritage a priority?

We asked respondents:

If you had to choose just three, what do you think are the most urgent priorities for the future of Syria?

The top answers were:

• safety and security (60%)

• electricity, water and other services (56%)

• unemployment and poverty services (35%), and

• a political solution (33%).

Less than one-third (31%) of respondents listed “heritage protection and reconstruction” in their top three urgent priorities for the future of Syria.

Should heritage sites be reconstructed?

We asked survey respondents whether they agreed with the statement:

Heritage sites that were damaged or destroyed during recent conflicts should be restored or reconstructed.

The overwhelming majority (98%) of respondents agreed, while just 2% disagreed.

We also asked:

What would you prefer to see happen to the heritage sites that have been damaged or destroyed during the recent conflicts?

Only 1% of those surveyed wanted to see damaged heritage sites left in ruins.

Of the remainder, the majority (57%) preferred the reconstruction focus less on restoring the historical authenticity of the site and more on transforming it into a more modern facility.

We also asked:

If you had to choose just one, who would you most like to see being entrusted with any restoration or reconstruction work at heritage sites?

By far the largest level of support was for the Syrian government (31%) and ordinary Syrians (20%).

Following at some distance were relatively low levels of support for global agencies. This included UNESCO (13%) or Western governments such as the US, UK or Europe (4%).

The lowest level of support was for regime allies like Russia (2%) or Iran (1%) to spearhead heritage reconstruction projects in Aleppo.

Implications for international actors

Overall, these findings show very few respondents placed heritage reconstruction among the most urgent priorities facing Syria. However, heritage restoration also had broad support from Aleppo citizens.

International actors currently engaged in heritage projects in Aleppo must make every effort to work closely with key partners and communities. This will help ensure their endeavours are better embedded within broader security, developmental and infrastructure investment.

The fact so many survey respondents preferred damaged structures be transformed into new, useful and more modern facilities was also significant.

This highlights a tension between groups like UNESCO, which tend to prioritise preserving the so-called “authenticity” of heritage sites, and the needs of a populace left with little public infrastructure.

Our findings also highlight that if ongoing efforts to reconstruct Aleppo’s heritage are to be embraced by locals, foreign actors will need to foster an authentic grassroots process. This means Syrians should take ultimate responsibility for the reconstruction of their heritage.

Taken together, our findings have important implications for the future of heritage sites in places like Ukraine and Gaza. If peace soon returns to either area, there will undoubtedly be an influx of (mostly) well-intentioned foreign actors who want to reconstruct heritage sites.

However, engaging with the local population is key. We must ask whether locals see restoration as a priority, what form they want it to take, and the extent to which they support foreign-led heritage interventions.

This is perhaps the only way such efforts can have a meaningful long-term impact.

Benjamin Isakhan has received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Department of Defence.

Lynn Meskell 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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Reconstructing heritage after war: what we learned from asking 1,600 Syrians about rebuilding Aleppo – https://theconversation.com/reconstructing-heritage-after-war-what-we-learned-from-asking-1-600-syrians-about-rebuilding-aleppo-229627

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bruce Mountain, Director, Victoria Energy Policy Centre, Victoria University

CSIRO’s latest annual GenCost update, released last month, was billed as Australia’s “most comprehensive electricity generation cost report”.

GenCost has proven to be highly controversial. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton previously levelled robust criticism at the report, specifically the high costs attributed to building nuclear power in Australia, and called for a rerun of the numbers. In turn, CSIRO’s chief made a similarly robust defence of the report and of his agency.

This debate speaks to a key problem with GenCost and similar reports that strive to nail down numbers for the cost of new power sources.

The problem is, these numbers depend on many, many variables. We can’t simply say one type of power is cheaper than another.

Seeking impossible certainty

In 2018, Australia’s energy market operator (AEMO) asked CSIRO to help provide costings as it developed its Integrated System Plan, a blueprint for the development of the electricity system in Australia’s southern and eastern states.

This is where GenCost comes from. Every year, CSIRO experts work to compare the average cost of electricity from different sources, by reporting the capital (construction) and operating costs of electricity generation of different types of power sources.

It also estimates a measure of average costs, formally known as the “levelised cost of electricity”.

Trouble is, CSIRO is trying to do the impossible. We simply cannot know for sure how the economics of specific plants compare. There are many reasons for this.

1. Upfront cost

The cost of renewables is concentrated up front in construction; they cost very little to run. By contrast, the cost of nuclear, fossil fuel and biomass plants is spread out over their lifespan, because they have large fuel costs and cost much more to operate and maintain. Comparing these two groups requires many subjective assumptions on lifetime, fuel costs, closure costs and the operating regime. Different assumptions give radically different results.

2. Technical characteristics

Wind, solar and run-of-river hydro generators produce electricity at rates which vary with the weather, while those with stored fuels (nuclear, coal, biomass, hydro and gas) can produce electricity on demand. Weather-dependent generation is often cheaper than stored-fuel generation but to fairly compare it to stored-fuel generation it requires storage. How much storage you need is heavily contested. Power systems depending only on renewable electricity and storage will be prohibitively expensive with current technologies, according to our research. In South Australia, our modelling shows the first 5 GWh of storage displaces substantially more stored fuel power than the next 15 GWh, which displaces about as much as the next 180 GWh of storage.

3. New transmission

Some solar and wind farms might need new transmission lines to connect their power to the grid, while others can tap into existing transmission lines. Blanket calculations – such as those in GenCost of transmission costs associated with new wind and solar – are not meaningful.

4. Upstream infrastructure

A coal power plant needs a coal mine, a gas plant needs gas fields and pipelines. These costs are often (but not always) fully accounted for in the calculation of stored-fuel generator operating costs.

5. Local environment

Both weather-dependent and stored-fuel generators can damage the local environment and affect local communities through air, land and water pollution and loss of amenity. These are real economic costs, though sometimes called social costs, and impacts vary greatly from one generator to another.

6. Fossil fuels differ

Fossil-fuel generators are worsening global warming, but there are significant differences among different generators. CSIRO has not accounted for greenhouse gas emissions in its comparisons.

7. Substitute or complement?

Generators, storage and transmission can be substitutes, meaning building one avoids building another (locating generators close to cities might avoid building transmission lines), while at other times they can complement (building renewables creates incentives to build batteries). A realistic comparison must account for this. Again, blanket generalisations are not possible – it has to be case by case.

8. Convention

Conventions on the allocation of costs greatly affect comparison. For example, the way transmission costs (or access rights) are allocated between new entrants and incumbents affects comparison of generators. Different approaches produce quite different costs.

9. Assumptions versus reality

There’s often a wide gap between how generators are assumed to operate, and how they actually operate. Once built, generators respond not just to the availability of wind, sun, coal, water, gas and so on, but also to the physical system and market prices. Most coal plants in the National Electricity Market no longer produce electricity consistently, due to being pushed out by renewable generators which cost almost nothing to operate. Similarly, wind farm operators respond to abundant solar by cutting generation during the middle of the day.

GenCost does not account for this. But it can be very significant. Our analysis suggests market prices and transmission could push average costs for solar power in Victoria’s Murray region 62% higher than the market operators is modelling.

Known unknowns

Of these nine factors, GenCost ignores the last five. While the report takes the other factors into account, different approaches for each of these would give very different answers.

Comparing the average costs of wind, solar, nuclear, hydro and coal power sounds like a simple thing to do. But the only plausible answer is: “it depends on many barely known and many unknown things”.

It would be constructive to seek to identify those things and their relationships to each other, rather than attempting to provide certainty.

Our energy market operator and chief scientific agency have got themselves into the position of providing supposedly definitive, objective answers to questions that do not lend themselves to definitive, objective answers.

In response to the claims made in this article, a CSIRO spokesperson said:

GenCost reports are updated annually to provide cost range estimates for new build electricity generation technologies using the best available data and modelling common in the industry.

Open to transparent public consultation and industry input, Gencost is policy- and technology-neutral and provides representative cost range estimates. Specific projects are not in scope for GenCost and investors must do their own deeper studies and analysis to determine all potential costs to a specific project.

What should we do?

In place of commissioning grand plans, our governments should instead broadly indicate their desired direction, consistent with the legislated economy-wide emission reduction targets.

If our government finds it politically unviable to price greenhouse gas pollution, it must provide financial support for clean generation expansion consistent with the legislated emission reduction policy and the governments’ broad direction.

Beyond that, policymakers, CSIRO and the market operator, AEMO, should get out of the way and leave it to the industry, customers and other interested parties to find agreement.

This is roughly how things worked before GenCost and the ISP. We can move forward by winding the clock back.

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 their academic appointment.

– ref. Known unknowns: controversy over CSIRO’s electricity report reveals an uncomfortable truth – https://theconversation.com/known-unknowns-controversy-over-csiros-electricity-report-reveals-an-uncomfortable-truth-231691

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jen Purdie, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Sustainability, University of Otago

This week’s announcement of the government’s plans to reopen New Zealand’s territorial waters to oil drilling comes as no surprise. All three coalition parties campaigned on reversing the 2018 ban on offshore oil exploration.

But it flies in the face of projections that demand for oil could peak as early as this decade.

Minister for Resources Shane Jones has confirmed the government plans to reverse the ban later this year and seeks to incentivise oil investors by paying them a bond in case their drilling rights are cancelled by future governments.

The government is also considering weakening a law that requires oil and gas permit holders to pay for the decommissioning and clean-up of wells. This law was passed in 2021 in response to taxpayers having to pick up a NZ$400 million bill for decommissioning the Tui oil field after the financial collapse of the oil company.

The government’s decisions go against projections by many sources, including the International Energy Agency, that demand for oil will decline soon as we electrify the global transport fleet. Consequently, investment in oil exploration is projected to decline too.

Peak oil demand

The use of fossil fuels is due to decline this decade, according to several major oil companies. A 2023 report by Shell projects fossil fuel use dropping rapidly in coming decades, while BP thinks oil demand for combustion has already peaked.

Many large organisations think peak oil demand will happen this decade or the 2030s. This includes the International Energy Agency (IEA), which has predicted demand for oil will peak before 2030.

The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and Exxon Mobil are bullishly stating they see oil growth continuing, albeit at a slower rate, into the 2040s. But at the same time, Exxon Mobil is investing significantly in renewable energy, lithium mining and carbon capture technology.

Even if oil demand peaks later than forecast, the progression from prospecting to exploration and mining can take decades. Projects prospected now may not yield fuel until demand is already in decline.

We have enough oil to make the energy transition

We’ve known for some time that remaining fossil fuels must stay in the ground to meet the Paris Agreement goal of keeping the world below 2°C above pre-industrial temperatures.

The last UN climate summit – COP28 held late last year – agreed to “transition away from fossil fuels” and signalled the “beginning of the end” of the fossil fuel era.

But further to this, the IEA has stated we don’t need any new fossil fuel exploration or development, with enough projects already in existence or planned to meet global energy demand forecasts to 2050. New research agrees, saying governments around the world should stop issuing new oil, gas and coal licences.

In line with decreasing oil demand, BP also projects declining investment in new oil and gas infrastructure globally in coming decades. The IEA’s World Energy Investment report notes an ongoing hesitancy about oil and gas investment comes partly from concerns about downward long-term demand projections.

New Zealand does not import natural gas, but our gas fields have been yielding less than forecast for some years. Therefore, to remain independent, some more maintenance drilling or limited new expansion may be needed to see us through the energy transition. But using taxpayer dollars to pay international oil companies to come to New Zealand doesn’t make economic or environmental sense.

The momentum for the energy transition is unstoppable

The good news is that the world’s energy sector, which produces almost 75% of global emissions, is now transitioning at an ever increasing rate. Significant amounts of renewable electricity generation (which is now far cheaper than fossil fuel generation) are being built, with global renewable capacity set to double this decade.

New Zealand’s electricity system is already 85% renewable. Significant investment in renewable generation is under way ($42 billion by 2030) to supply the approximate doubling of electricity needed for the expected mass electrification of transport and industrial heat by 2050.

Renewables are also being built to replace retiring coal plant. Global coal consumption peaked in 2013 and has flatlined since. In 2021, the COP26 global climate meeting in Glasgow agreed to phase down coal, and 60 national (and 51 sub-national) governments have joined the Powering Past Coal Alliance, committing them to phasing out all coal-fired power plants and not building new ones.

Other uses of fossil fuels are in industrial heat and transport. Electric vehicle demand is skyrocketing globally, with the global fleet growing from 300,000 vehicles in 2013 to 41 million in 2023. With prices falling, electric vehicles are expected to reach price parity with internal combustion engine cars as early as 2025.

Most large global vehicle manufacturers have pledged to produce only electric vehicles by 2030 or 2040. And 30 countries, including New Zealand, have signed the Zero Emissions Vehicle declaration to ban new petrol or diesel vehicle sales entirely by 2040.

New Zealand should be enabling the energy transition

The world is moving very rapidly away from coal and oil, and eventually all fossil fuels. A growing number of countries require adherence to Paris Agreement pledges by their trading partners. The recently signed free trade deal between New Zealand and the EU imposes trade sanctions if Paris pledges are not met.

New Zealand’s current emissions reduction policies take us on a track that is much less than our per capita global fair share to limit warming.

New Zealand should be moving away from oil drilling and instead invest in the energy transition, including decarbonisation of industrial heat, subsidising low-emitting vehicles and charging high emitters, better public transport and bike lanes, increased EV charging infrastructure, and “urban mining” (recycling) of batteries and other technology currently filling rubbish dumps.

Jen Purdie has received funding from Deep South Science Challenge in the past, and currently has funding from MBIE’s Smart Ideas fund.

– ref. Global demand for oil could peak soon – NZ’s plan to revive offshore exploration doesn’t add up – https://theconversation.com/global-demand-for-oil-could-peak-soon-nzs-plan-to-revive-offshore-exploration-doesnt-add-up-232154