<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sunland-group">Sunland Group</a> has officially lodged plans for its first Gold Coast apartment project since the departure of the Abedian family from the company three years ago, unveiling a new high-rise proposal for a prominent Broadbeach corner site on Old Burleigh Road.

The application was submitted by an entity directed by Tom Jamieson, stepson of longtime Sunland leader Soheil Abedian, and Riaz Rezvanipour, brother-in-law of Sahba Abedian, Soheil’s son.

Sunland acquired the 1,283 sqm site on the corner of Old Burleigh Road and Armrick Avenue for $9.5 million late last year and is now seeking approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/99-101-old-burleigh-road-broadbeach-qld-4218">42-storey tower with 81 apartments</a>.

<img alt="First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="fea2946d-90ee-4cfc-babe-2a8ad5db2cb6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers.png?VersionId=BV0fihJw31nDIQ8ozY_h3GbS8mxDyhnm" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/contreras-earl-architecture">Contreras Earl Architecture</a>, the proposed tower at 99-101 Old Burleigh Road would deliver a predominantly larger-format apartment mix aimed at the owner-occupier market. Plans include 17 two-bedroom apartments, 55 three-bedroom apartments, and nine four-bedroom residences across 35 residential levels.

The development also incorporates three basement levels, four podium parking levels, two levels of communal recreation facilities, and rooftop plant and equipment. A total of 189 car spaces are proposed, significantly exceeding the 90 spaces required under the planning scheme.

The architecture adopts a sculpted, curvilinear form, with deep wraparound balconies and integrated landscaping intended to soften the tower’s vertical expression. The planning report states the building’s “slender footprint/form provides a complimentary yet varied built form within the local streetscape” and contributes to “a varied, yet ordered skyline.”

Contreras Earl noted in its Architectural Statement that from the early stages, the project addressed a fundamental challenge: how to accommodate the required residential yield while avoiding the conventional model of a tower sitting on a rigid, fully resolved parking podium.

“The most direct response would have been to consolidate parking into a singular, flat podium and extrude a repetitive tower above,” the statement said. “While efficient, this approach would result in a consolidated built form with limited engagement with the surrounding landscape and public realm.”

Instead, the conventional podium model was “deliberately rejected”. The architects described the base of the building as “a landscaped architectural condition where structure, planting and circulation are integrated”.

“Rather than presenting a continuous built mass, the base of the building is articulated through a series of concrete planter elements that organise the podium into a fragmented system,” the statement said. “This approach reduces the perceived bulk of the lower levels while establishing a more permeable interface with the streetscape and adjacent open space.”

<img alt="Sunland" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="923fad8d-c960-4527-8fbe-975cf1ddf88d" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%2010.32.03%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=pngwb0hYOIUpq9vDw6F2EsOiVuHF3DiX" />

&nbsp;

The site sits within the High Density Residential Zone and inside the City of Gold Coast’s unrestricted “HX” building height area, where the planning framework anticipates intensified residential development tied to the expanding light rail corridor. The planning report notes the area is undergoing “transition toward more intense development forms” given its proximity to Broadbeach, Surfers Paradise, and high-frequency public transport infrastructure.

Positioned directly opposite Broadbeach Park and within walking distance of Florida Gardens light rail station, the development would sit among a rapidly evolving stretch of Old Burleigh Road that has become one of the Gold Coast’s most active apartment development corridors.

The application joins a growing pipeline of luxury residential projects reshaping Broadbeach, including nearby developments by 5Point Projects, Polycell, and Graya.

The planning report argues the project contributes toward the Gold Coast’s long-term housing targets under the South East Queensland Regional Plan, which forecasts the need for more than 100,000 additional high-rise dwellings across the city by 2046.

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-4" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" dir="auto">
The Abedian family departed Sunland Group in late 2023, ending a four-decade association with the company, and subsequently established the private development firm Abedian &amp; Co. The group is currently delivering <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/greenmount-residences-cnr-hill-street-and-marine-parade-coolangatta-qld-4225">Greenmount Residences</a> at Rainbow Bay and recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/18-mary-avenue-14-18-mary-avenue-broadbeach-qld-4218">18 Mary Avenue</a> in Broadbeach.
</section>

Joel Robinson

First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach new apartment market with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans

The Minns Labor Government has established the new Bays West Delivery Authority to lead the development&nbsp;of the Bays West Precinct and Blackwattle Bay Precinct.&nbsp;

The Authority is charged with creating Sydney’s newest precinct, a thriving, connected, sustainable hub with White Bay Power Station as its cultural heart. Its vision is to build on the area’s natural, cultural and industrial history to shape a vibrant new neighbourhood.

The precinct will deliver up to 8,500 well-located homes, including a minimum of 10 per cent affordable and essential worker homes. Combine new housing with public open space, opening public access to the waterfront for the first time in more than 100 years, while retaining important deep-water facilities to support Sydney’s working harbour.

Located just minutes from the Sydney CBD and connected to a world-class metro, ferry, walking and cycling links, the Bays West precinct will rebalance housing growth towards well-serviced inner-city locations and help tackle the state’s housing crisis.

The Bays West Delivery Authority,&nbsp;an agency of the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, will report to the NSW Minister for Lands and Property who already has oversight of major precinct renewal projects including at Blackwattle Bay and Barangaroo.

As part of the broader Bays West transformation, the Minns Government recently announced that a proposal from Lendlease to redevelop part of the Bays West Precinct has progressed to Stage 2 of the NSW Government’s unsolicited proposals process.

<img alt="Sydney" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2ed71eb9-d8e8-4fa7-b9d1-de4531dcf2f3" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%209.42.31%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=IDryFIbped9SNDg72LEN_EecvhUsOPvp" />

The Minns Labor Government has also confirmed the Bays West precinct will have a new suburb name. This will be the first major suburb built in close proximity to Sydney’s CBD in decades and will encompass the area currently being referred to as Bays West, including Glebe Island and the White Bay Power Station. Served by a new Metro station just five minutes from the CBD, it will become one of the most populous suburbs in the Inner West and one of Sydney’s premier cultural destinations.

An early works program is taking shape, which&nbsp;includes the first stages of an international design competition.&nbsp;

The aim of the Bays West&nbsp;International&nbsp;Design Competition is to&nbsp;ensure design excellence is embedded in the project from the start. The competition will deliver an&nbsp;urban framework that defines the character, ambition and long-term identity of&nbsp;this&nbsp;former industrial precinct as it transitions to a vibrant, inclusive and sustainable residential&nbsp;neighbourhood.

The competition will be led by the Bays West Delivery Authority in partnership with Government Architect NSW.&nbsp;

It will launch with an invitation for a global Expressions of Interest, before moving to an invitation-only stage that will be assessed by a panel that&nbsp;will provide advice to Cabinet who will select a winner.

Premier of NSW, Chris Minns said the establishment of the new Authority is the first step in transforming the Bays West precinct into a vibrant, livable suburb minutes from the Sydney CBD and two stops from Hunter St Station on the Metro West line.

“The Authority will deliver well-located homes close to the heart of the city and integrate the new precinct with Blackwattle Bay and the new Sydney Fish Market.

“This is a generational opportunity to build a new suburb on the city’s edge and open the harbour foreshore to the public for the first time in a century.”&nbsp;

Minister for Lands and Property Steve Kamper said the new Bays West Delivery Authority established by the Minns Government will turbocharge the development of Sydney’s newest suburb.

“The Authority is working at a record pace to deliver an international design competition, planning pathways and a financial model so that this development benefits Sydney with well-designed homes in a central location, close to public transport, jobs, entertainment and essential services.

“If we want Sydney to stay liveable and affordable, we need to be bold about using underutilised government-owned land to deliver homes for the future while making sure essential working harbour functions can be accommodated.”

Bays West Delivery Authority established to "turbocharge" Sydney’s newest suburb

Around 400 additional homes could be built at Southwark Grounds on Port Road, lifting total site capacity from 1300 to around 1700 dwellings.

A recently approved code amendment would allow apartment towers of up to 14 storeys in some areas of Renewal SA’s redevelopment of the former West End Brewery.

Renewal SA Acting Chief Executive Shane Wingard said he welcomed the code amendment, with the increase in heights and homes making a positive impact on the supply of high-quality, well-connected housing close to the city.

“By going higher across some parts of Southwark Grounds, we are adding a substantial number of very well-located homes with little impact on project delivery time or planned open space,” Mr Wingard said.

Since the project officially launched in 2025, Mr Wingard said more than 12,000 enquiries had been received about living at Southwark Grounds.

“The very strong early interest we’ve seen since homes were first released in the precinct reinforces our plans to create more housing opportunities,” he said.

The Southwark Grounds code amendment was launched in December last year, with community engagement undertaken over five weeks from January.

It proposed increasing maximum building heights from eight to 14 storeys on the eastern section of Southwark Grounds, and to 12 storeys across the remainder of the site, with minimum building heights ranging from two to four storeys.

The code amendment was implemented through an Early Commencement policy in late January, allowing developers to quickly explore the viability of increased height and housing yield while other planning processes continue.

One of the first developers delivering apartment sites have already finalised redesigns to increase the number of apartments following the code amendment.

Samaras’ development adjacent to the future Colonel Light Park is now planning to deliver 125 apartments across 11 storeys, significantly greater than original plans of around 50 apartments across four storeys.

The developer is also exploring the potential for additional affordable housing outcomes.

Most of the apartments at Southwark Grounds will be delivered within a master-planned precinct on a large parcel of land on the eastern portion of the site, covering around two-thirds of its 8.4 hectares.

Wingard said detailed precinct planning over the coming months may identify further opportunities to increase yield further that could see total apartment numbers at Southwark Grounds, exceed this number.

Affordable homes at Southwark Grounds will also see a net increase, with Renewal SA maintaining its commitment to a minimum of 20 per cent affordable housing across the development.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Civil works have begun across the site, with construction under way on the first new roads surrounding a townhouse precinct in the south‑west corner of Southwark Grounds. This includes Renewal SA’s 17 Founder’s Row homes, which are on track for completion by Christmas.

“We expect to have people living at Southwark Grounds by the end of the year, so delivering roads and public spaces for those residents is among our highest priorities.”

Construction of 40 townhouses off Anderson Street, known as West Village and being delivered by Contour, is forecast to begin in mid‑2026. Kolabb’s Anderson Lane development will follow shortly after, delivering a further 26 townhouses.

Southwark Grounds is a state government‑led urban renewal project now set to deliver around 1,700 homes over the next decade.

Homes will be supported by a supermarket, a range of retail and hospitality offerings anchored by a revitalised Walkerville Brew Tower, a childcare centre, car parking and well‑connected public spaces.

400 new homes planned for Adelaide's former West End Brewery site

Brisbane developer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/cavcorp">Cavcorp</a> has lodged plans for a new mixed-use residential development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/55-wyandra-street-teneriffe-qld-4005">55 Wyandra Street</a>, Teneriffe, anchored by an 85-metre public laneway designed to reconnect the suburb’s riverfront with the Gasworks precinct.

The buildings, known as Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane, would replace the existing Queensland Cotton head office site with a 15-storey residential tower transitioning to eight storeys toward Helen Street. The project has been designed by Plazibat Architects and lodged as a code assessable development application for 93 apartments across a 3,401 sqm mixed-use site within the Newstead and Teneriffe Waterfront neighbourhood plan.

Central to the scheme is the transformation of an existing service easement into a publicly accessible cross-block connection linking Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the new laneway will act as both a pedestrian shortcut and a landscaped civic space between the Teneriffe Riverwalk, ferry terminal, and Gasworks precinct.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="26e7f058-b065-4de8-b13d-a2b8cb64dfcc" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/bldg.png?VersionId=sELS0ZKYi361oYipUa1BIKfe_.DLZoFV" />

“The revised proposal delivers a legacy public-realm cross-block link, permanently secured for community use, transforming an existing private easement into a safe, high-quality pedestrian connection between the Teneriffe heritage riverwalk and the Gasworks–Long Island precinct,” the planning report states.

The laneway will sit beneath a large subtropical loggia integrated into the podium levels of the development. The design incorporates deep landscaping, water gardens, lobby spaces, business lounges, and ground-floor apartments to create what Cavcorp describes as a climate-responsive “urban verandah.”

The tower itself has been designed as a slender form with recessed floorplates and curved translucent corners inspired by contemporary Japanese architecture. The building height aligns with the Commercial Road precinct controls, which permit towers up to 15 storeys within proximity to Longland Street.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a8a17d40-43b6-4718-b3fd-67676fcbb485" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers%202_1.png?VersionId=i3VwDtp5AmL_8InW7w4qRbDFEpb744Jt" />

The project will comprise a mix of larger-format apartments aimed at owner-occupiers, downsizers, and families. The proposed apartment mix includes 11 loggia apartments across the lower levels, 50 four-bedroom Sky-Terrace apartments from levels three to seven, and 32 Sky-Pool Homes occupying the upper tower levels. The Sky-Pool Homes will feature private thermal plunge pools integrated into oversized balconies.

According to the application, the apartments are intended to reinterpret the scale and character of Teneriffe’s woolstore conversions and Queensland homes within a vertical residential format.

“The sky-pool homes build on Cavcorp’s previous projects and introduce a distinct apartment typology to Teneriffe, informed by both local and international precedent and responding to an identified market demand for enhanced safety, space and amenity,” the planning submission notes.

A major focus of the proposal is its five-level wellness and lifestyle offering, extending from the basement through to the rooftop.

Amenities proposed include a rooftop Swim &amp; Racquet Club with a 25-metre Olympic lap pool and tennis court, coworking spaces and libraries, golf simulators, wine storage, concierge facilities, business lounges, pet wash areas, and rooftop longevity-focused wellness spaces with spas, outdoor fitness zones, and landscaped terraces.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="944b352c-49b9-4247-a4c6-5967b4b69fda" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/amenity.png?VersionId=Ed_qKjAtMwFT.5gfl3jiA9QwdWxSMsaX" />

All parking will be concealed within basement levels accessed from Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the deep-basement engineering approach allows the entire ground plane to prioritise landscaping, pedestrian movement, and active frontage rather than vehicle infrastructure.

The development continues Cavcorp’s concentration in Newstead and Teneriffe, where the Brisbane developer has delivered a number of apartment projects including Lucent, Le Bain, and Luminare, as well as the Long Island Wellness Precinct nearby. Several of those projects have received national design and architecture awards, including recognition under Brisbane’s “Buildings that Breathe” program.

Cavcorp unveils wellness-focused Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane apartment buildings

Focus Group Investments has lodged plans for a new apartment development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/64-70-hanover-street-fitzroy-vic-3065">64–70 Hanover Street</a> in Fitzroy, seeking to utilise the Victorian Government’s recently introduced Great Design Fast Track pathway to accelerate approvals for the project.

The proposal is among the latest developments to emerge through the state-led initiative, which was established to fast-track well-designed residential projects in activity centres and transport-connected inner-city locations. The pathway allows qualifying developments that meet elevated design and housing benchmarks to bypass traditional council planning timeframes and instead be assessed directly by the Department of Transport and Planning.

Designed by SJB, the development will comprise a mix of apartments above activated lower levels, with a strong focus on architectural articulation, landscaping, and communal amenity. The design response seeks to balance the industrial character of Richmond’s former warehouse precincts with a more contemporary residential form.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="abea51cc-d85b-479e-9aef-a589f3b37ca7" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/ground.png?VersionId=e1Kf8EyPWwyiVumtqQ4rM5S4GpOR3CCz" />

Proposed are 63 new dwellings, a wide ranging mix of studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments, and townhouses and duplexes. They will be spread across a part-three, part-eight storey building.

The Planning and Urban Context Report by Tract says the development is of an "exemplary architectural standard" and has been carefully crafted by SJB Architects.

"Dwellings&nbsp;will benefit from excellent access to natural light, cross-ventilation opportunities and extensive communal space," the report noted.

The architectural material highlights the project’s integration of landscaped elements and communal spaces throughout the building. The proposal also incorporates sustainability initiatives aligned with the Victorian Government’s push for higher-performing apartment developments under the fast-track program.

The Great Design Fast Track was unveiled by the Victorian Government in 2024 as part of a broader housing supply strategy aimed at accelerating the delivery of new homes. Projects assessed through the pathway must demonstrate high-quality architecture, sustainability outcomes, and housing diversity while being located close to public transport and existing infrastructure.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="afdbe834-8dc4-4a77-a943-ba07bc927348" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/site_11.png?VersionId=0J657j.TaChAZfp93wqJYBTqSsnREJx2" />

Focus Group, founder and led by Paul De Lutiis, is increasingly active across Melbourne’s inner suburbs, targeting well-connected urban renewal locations suited to medium and higher-density residential development. The Fitzroy proposal continues that strategy, leveraging the area’s strong transport links, established retail amenity, and proximity to the CBD.

Fitzroy has been one of the most popular spots for developers and buyers in recent years. The likes of PACE Development Group, SMA Projects, Crema Group and Chapter Group, currently selling projects in the suburb.

First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Fitzroy apartments

Climate change

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/82206/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Renewable energy is driving profound changes in cities.
It’s happening much more quickly than was expected even five years ago. Responding to climate change, networks of decision-makers, such as the C40 collective of major cities, have begun adopting strategies to promote the uptake of renewable energy. Yet land use planning has seemingly begun to lag behind.
As an example, few, if any, planning codes in Australia prevent overshadowing of rooftop solar systems (photovoltaic and hot water). Instead, disputes are being decided in the courts.
Effective guidance on the retrofitting and redesign of built environment energy systems must occur across scales, from rooftops to wider electricity grids. We need reliable institutional and policy guidelines to improve investment certainty and limit negative outcomes.
So what is the role of planning? What challenges and actions must planners consider for the renewable energy transition to be effective?
Renewable are proliferating
Historically, cities have been built on fossil fuels. These power buildings, lighting, transport, air conditioning, water supply systems, sewage treatment and more.
Technological change and concerns about climate change threats, energy security, air pollution reduction and fossil fuel power costs have recently driven huge advancements in renewable energy options for cities. As renewables rapidly gain market traction, the costs are falling dramatically relative to fossil fuel options.
Many different types of renewable energy have the potential to radically transform built environments. These include solar (both photovoltaic and molten salt), wind, tidal, biogas, biofuel, pumped hydro and potentially even nuclear fusion – though the latter may still be some time away.
At present, this technological growth appears to be outpacing land-use planning systems, and many planners seem to be fighting a rear-guard action.
What role can planners play?
Traditionally, planners have assessed the acceptability, or otherwise, of different types of development. Land uses that were deemed incompatible were separated into different zones.
Infrastructural and technological provisions associated with developments are usually strategically planned in advance. Site-specific issues are then assessed through development approval processes.
There are, however, still relatively few land use planning policies and guidelines for engaging effectively with renewable energy. This is a global problem, though some jurisdictions are ahead of others.
A front-runner is the UK, where the Department for Communities and Local Government issued planning practice guidance for renewable and low-carbon energy in 2013. This was a welcome early response. And perhaps surprising, given the comparative lack of sunlight in the UK.
Conversely, Ireland still lacks a strategic plan for solar farm development. This seems remiss given Ireland has an almost identical planning system and roughly the same amount of sunlight as the UK.
In sunnier Australia, the signs are that things are beginning to change. For example, the New South Wales government recently issued guidelines on the approval of solar and wind farms. Queensland has a wind farm state code and guidelines. The City of Melbourne now provides planning guidance for solar energy.
California is forging ahead with solar leasing and is experimenting with mandatory solar for new buildings. The state is also making strides in wind energy.
How should planning systems adapt?
We urgently need more renewable-friendly planning systems to capture its potential benefits and avoid overshooting the 2°C target for global warming. This will mean finding ways to “fast-track” energy generation deemed to be low risk with manageable impacts.
As well as developing practical guidance, planners need to ask some key questions. Are these technologies safe? Might they disrupt other land uses? Does large-scale uptake potentially have unintended consequences?
An easy win for planners is to devise codes and planning scheme provisions to protect rooftop solar installations from overshadowing. Rooftop solar is becoming an integral part of the energy mix in many areas, with surplus production often feeding back into the grid.
A failure of planning to manage a simple issue like overshadowing will result in a loss of potential electricity production, with negative implications for householders and grids.
Medium-scale commercial solar PV farms, providing 1-10MW generating capacity, are likely soon to be a common feature of many suburbs and communities. However, these facilities can present challenges when placed in urban areas. Again, clear planning guidance is needed.
The planning implications of these solar PV farms are only beginning to be understood. The issues include, but are not limited to, site selection, (re)zoning, stakeholder engagement, visual impact minimisation and mediating social, economic and/or ecological constraints.
Even as planners begin to engage with the issues of current renewable technologies, newer technologies are quickly encroaching. This adds to the urgency of the planning challenges; constant reappraisal is needed.
Where to next?
Soon we will likely have to better consider emerging technologies such as solar windows, integrated solar roofs, backyard biogas generators and even algae biofuel farming.
For example, could using backyard waste-to-biogas systems create issues with hygiene and infectious disease? What about maintenance? Will microgrids, which can help transitions to a grid with significant volumes of renewable energy, be able to handle demand?
We’ll need effective land use planning to answer these questions and many more. In times of intense transformation, planners will have to provide clear guidance. They must not let themselves fall behind the pace of urban energy transitions.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tony-matthews-234160" target="_blank">Tony Matthews </a>is Lecturer in Urban &amp; Environmental Planning, Griffith University.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jason-byrne-6066" target="_blank">Jason Byrne </a>is Associate Professor of Environmental Planning, Griffith University.
Both are authors for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Pace of renewable energy shift leaves city planners struggling to keep up

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/77701/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The global tropical climate zone is expanding. At the current rate, by 2100 its edge will stretch from Sydney to Perth.
The Tropics are defined as the area of Earth where the Sun is directly overhead at least once a year — the zone between the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn.
However, tropical climates occur within a larger area about 30 degrees either side of the Equator. Earth’s dry subtropical zones lie adjacent to this broad region. It is here that we find the great warm deserts of the world.
Earth’s bulging waistline
Earth’s tropical atmosphere is growing in all directions, leading one commentator to cleverly call this Earth’s “bulging waistline”.
Since 1979, the planet’s waistline been expanding poleward by 56km to 111km per decade in both hemispheres. Future climate projections suggest this expansion is likely to continue, driven largely by human activities – most notably emissions of greenhouse gases and black carbon, as well as warming in the lower atmosphere and the oceans.
If the current rate continues, by 2100 the edge of the new dry subtropical zone would extend from roughly Sydney to Perth.
As these dry subtropical zones shift, droughts will worsen and overall less rain will fall in most warm temperate regions.
Poleward shifts in the average tracks of tropical and extratropicalcyclones are already happening. This is likely to continue as the tropics expand further. As extratropical cyclones move, they shift rain away from temperate regions that historically rely upon winter rainfalls for their agriculture and water security.
Researchers have observed that, as climate zones change, animals and plants migrate to keep up. But as biodiversity and ecosystem services are threatened, species that can’t adjust to rapidly changing conditions face extinction.
In some biodiversity hotspots – such as the far southwest of Australia – there are no suitable land areas (only oceans) for ecosystems and species to move into to keep pace with warming and drying trends.
We are already witnessing an expansion of pests and diseases into regions that were previously climatically unsuitable. This suggests that they will attempt to follow any future poleward shifts in climate zones.
I recently drew attention to the anticipated impacts of an expanding tropics for Africa. So what might this might mean for Australia?
Australia is vulnerable
Australia’s geographical location makes it highly vulnerable to an expanding tropics. About 60% of the continent lies north of 30°S.
As the edge of the dry subtropical zone continues to creep south, more of southern Australia will be subject to its drying effects.
Meanwhile, the fringes of the north of the continent may experience rainfall and temperature conditions that are more typical of our northern neighbours.
The effects of the expanding tropics are already being felt in southern Australia in the form of declining winter rainfall. This is especially the case in the southwest and — to a lesser extent — the continental southeast.
Future climate change projections for Australia include increasing air and ocean temperatures, rising sea levels, more hot days (over 35℃), declining rainfall in the southern continental areas, and more extreme fire weather events.
For northern Australia, changes in annual rainfall remain uncertain. However, there is a high expectation of more extreme rainfall events, many more hot days and more severe (but less frequent) tropical cyclones and associated storm surges in coastal areas.
Dealing with climate change
Adaptation to climate change will be required across all of Australia. In the south the focus will have to be on adapting to projected drying trends. Other challenges include more frequent droughts, more warm spells and hot days, higher fire weather risk and rising sea levels in coastal areas.
The future growth of the north remains debatable. I have already pointed out the lack of consideration of climate change in the White Paper for the Development of Northern Australia.
The white paper neglects to explain how planned agricultural, mining, tourism and community development will adapt to projected changes in climate over coming decades — particularly, the anticipated very high number of hot days.
For example, Darwin currently averages 47 hot days a year, but under a high carbon emission scenario, the number of hot days could approach 320 per year by 2090. If the north is to survive and thrive as a significant economic region of Australia, it will need effective climate adaptation strategies. This must happen now — not at some distant time in the future.
This requires bipartisan support from all levels of government, and a pan-northern approach to climate adaptation. It will be important to work closely with industry and affected local and Indigenous communities across the north.
These sectors must have access to information and solutions drawn from interdisciplinary, “public good” research. In the face of this urgent need, CSIRO cuts to such research and the defunding of the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility should be ringing alarm bells.
As we enter uncharted climate territory, never before has public-good research been more important and relevant.
Steve Turton is an Adjunct Professor of Environmental Geography at CQUniversity Australia and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steve-turton-15660" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

The world’s tropical zone is expanding, and Australia should be worried: Steve Turton

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
As natural disasters become more intense, it's time for insurance companies to help communities adapt to climate change.
As communities recover from the havoc wreaked by Cyclone Debbie, it’s time to accept that disasters will become more intense due to climate change and the cost of insurance will continue to rise.
Insurers have a unique insight into the risk and costs associated with climate change. If insurers better informed households about the terms and conditions of insurance and the potential costs of what’s not covered, consumers could help mitigate the risks themselves.
Insurers could also share data with government on how building and changes to infrastructure affects premiums. This would avoid surprises after a disaster hits.
Where insurance products are unaffordable, or cover unavailable, it’s often governments left to foot the bill. Since 2009, this has amounted to more than A$12 billion.
When governments can no longer afford the exorbitant clean up costs, the homeowner (or residents, in the case of renters) will be left with little recourse.
Rising premiums
The insurance industry is expecting premiums to be equal to 38% of annual income by the year 2100 for affected households. We are also starting to see a huge disparity in the cost of insurance between high and low risk areas.
Insurance premiums in Northern Queensland are already more than double that of Brisbane due to climate risk, for instance. Exorbitant costs of insurance may result in consumers being unable to afford cover.
To reduce these premiums, more adaptation and mitigation measures are critical.
One example of this is the partnership between insurer Suncorp and James Cook University to analyse data on insurance claims and to beef up cyclone protection by retrofitting homes. This partnership has reduced the cost of some insurance premiums.
The Productivity Commission inquiry into climate change adaption supported “market led adaptation”. This is in part premised on the insurance sector providing “price signals” - noting the costs via year to year for insurance premiums for various risks, so that consumers can adapt.
It would also be easier for consumers to adapt if the information about their coverage, beyond prices, was clearer. As noted in the Queensland Flood Inquiry report commissioned after the catastrophic flooding in 2011, insurers can help by using plain language in their insurance products. This includes in Product Disclosure Statements, particularly on what types of “flood” are covered.
Data to protect home owners
If there was a centralised, and freely available, source of climate risk data it would be easier to ensure consumers, government and insurers were all working on the same assumptions.
There is already some spatial data freely available, including by the CSIRO, via CoastAdapt, and even with local councils such as Lake Macquarie.
There is perhaps potential for the current Productivity Commission inquiry into data sharing to specifically consider data relating to climate risk. For example, the spatial data in the National Interest Dataset could be used to provide consistent, reliable and free data to consumers prior to their decision to live or to build in high risk locations.
This data is important for risk forecasting and planning by the public and private sector (including insurers) in order to avoid up to US$100billion of uninsured losses, due to natural disasters worldwide.
Land use and development
How we develop or build on land is critical for how insurers will price premiums.
Australians have a history of, and perhaps an affinity for, building in high risk locations, and then rebuilding there when disaster strikes. While some insurers are recognising the economic benefits of acting early by installing flood levies in some Queensland towns, relying on wall building might not produce the results the community expects.
It can result in communities feeling protected by a wall that may not withstand future climate risk. A better approach is to implement climate adaptation measures early.
Law courts have been tasked with considering the impact of climate risk into administrative decision making for close to a decade. Cases in New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland demonstrate the importance of a relevant decision maker properly factoring climate risk into development and land use planning decisions.
There are some instances where land use planning properly factors in climate risk. For example, in New South Wales previous land use decisions have allowed people to build close to at risk shorelines, or to place temporary works to protect homes during severe events. Now these are undergoing reform to include new laws which take into account expected future sea levels.
Getting reading for future events
As observed in the Productivity Commission inquiry into natural disaster mitigation, insurers can and need to do more to inform households on their policies, the natural hazards they face, and the indicative costs of rebuilding.
A wider availability of spatial data that quantifies risks to properties would assist home owners to be better prepared, but some of the responsibility lies with government as well.
It’s for local and state governments to determine whether, and where, rebuilding ought to occur.
Some of groundwork to improving all of these problems has already been set. The Federal Government setup a taskforce into insurance risks in Northern Australia, and the Productivity Commission has examined both barriers to climate change adaptation and mitigating the impact of natural disasters.
Governments need to play a central role. They must recognise the critical importance of a robust climate change mitigation and adaptation policy and then act on it. Only then will insurers get the signal for the need for change.
Tayanah O'Donnell is a Research Fellow with CURF at the University of Canberra and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tayanah-odonnell-122914" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

How insurers can get better at responding to natural disasters: Tayanah O'Donnell

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
GUEST OBSERVER
The latest updates to Green Star promise to accelerate action on climate change, incentivise new industries and encourage market leaders to push the innovation envelope, says the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA). 
Among the proposed evolutions to Green Star, are: 
<ul>
<li>
  minimum requirements for greenhouse gas emissions for different star ratings 
</li>
<li>
  measures to build industry capacity in air-tightness testing 
</li>
<li>
  a new materials pathway to incentivise the use of engineered timber and 
</li>
<li>  new requirements that will enhance the workplace environments of construction workers.</li>
</ul>
Minimum requirements for greenhouse gas emissions</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">The GBCA’s is reprioritising carbon as a key environmental issue – and setting minimum requirements is an important part of this. Under the proposed changes, a building project seeking 5 Star Green Star certification would be required to achieve three Green Star points in the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions’ credit, and be 25 percent more efficient than a benchmark building.</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">A 6 Star Green Star building would be required to achieve six points and demonstrate efficiency of almost 40 percent above the benchmark. The improvements would be addressed through energy efficiency or onsite renewables.</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">This measure would enable us to provide clearer differentiation between the star ratings, and to guarantee, as a minimum, that a 5 Star building would produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions than a 4 Star building, and so on.</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">Minimum requirements are part of a broader plan to align Green Star with the distinct trajectories outlined in the Paris Agreement.</div>
<div class="column">
 Air-tightness testing</div>
<div class="column">
 A proposed change to the ‘Commissioning and Tuning’ credit would drive the uptake of air-tightness testing.</div>
<div class="column">
 Under the revised credit, project teams would be required to undertake testing to demonstrate that the façade airtightness specifications had been achieved. “This isn’t about setting a standard for air-tightness yet, though this allows us to push Australia to take air-tightness seriously. This first step is about building industry capacity and educating project teams on the value of air-tightness testing.”</div>
<div class="column">
 The GBCA would analyse and share the information gathered from the credit to “better understand where Australian buildings are landing”, to support industry action on air-tightness testing and standards that respond to Australia’s unique climate conditions.</div>
<div class="column">
 Incentivising the use of engineered timber</div>
<div class="column">
 The GBCA is also proposing the introduction of a new pathway for engineered timber within the Materials category – just as we have for concrete and steel.</div>
<div class="column">
 This initiative recognises the innovative approach taken on projects such as Lendlease’s Forté and acknowledges the industry’s growing appetite for products such as Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) and Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL). </div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">Jorge Chapa is GBCA’s head of market transformation and can be contacted <a href="https://new.gbca.org.au" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

Property 101: Green Star updates open for consultation

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/68348/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Australia is a huge continent, but a coastal nation.
About 80 percent of Australians live within 50km of the coast, and a sea-level rise of 1.1 metres (a high-end scenario for 2100) would put about A$63 billion (in 2008 dollars) worth of residential buildings at risk. 
Anyone who lives along Sydney’s northern beaches, especially in Collaroy, saw at first hand the damage the ocean can wreak on coastal properties when the coastline was hit by a severe east coast low during a king tide in June.
There are many different factors that determine which coastal homes or suburbs are most at risk of inundation or erosion, either now or in the future. In a review published as part of a series produced by the Australian Energy and Water Exchange initiative, we investigated the causes of extreme sea levels and coastal impacts in Australia, how they have changed, and how they might change even more. While significant progress has been made over recent decades, many questions remain.
The first factor to consider is the average sea level, relative to the land elevation. This “background” sea level varies, both from year to year and season to season. Depending on where you live and what the climate is doing, background sea level can fluctuate by up to about 1m. Around Australia’s northern coastline, for example, El Niño and La Niña can cause large variations in year-to-year sea levels. 
On top of this are the tides, which rise and fall predictably, and whose range varies by location and phase of the moon. Most places have two tides a day, but curiously some only have one - including Perth. 
<a href="/images/2016/11/28/image-20161114-9065-mho9m6.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/11/28/image-20161114-9065-mho9m6.png" alt="">
Map of tide pattern variations. Red: one high and low tide daily (diurnal); blue: two high and low tides per day (semi-diurnal) with a mixed tidal regime between. OZEWEX, Author provided
On top of that again is the effect of the weather, the most notable short-term effects being storm surges and storm waves. During a surge, the storm pushes extra water onto the coast through a combination of wind pressure, wave buildup, and atmospheric pressure changes. Obviously these factors are much more localised than tides.
Extreme sea-level events, such as the one that hit Sydney in June, can arise from isolated events such as a storm surge. But more often they are due to a combination of natural phenomena that on their own may not be considered extreme. In Sydney, several factors aligned: a storm surge driven by an east coast low, an uncommon wave direction, a king tide, and a higher-than-average background sea level.
These processes already have the capacity to destroy coastal homes and infrastructure. But for the future, we also need to factor in climate change, which will raise the background sea level and may also change the frequency and intensity of storms.
<h2>Long-term trends</h2>
Average sea levels in Australian waters have been rising at rates similar to (but just below) the global average. Since 1993, Australian tide gauges show an average rise of 2.1mm per year, whereas satellite observationsreveal a global average rise of 3.4mm per year. 
What really counts is extreme sea levels, and these have been rising at roughly the same rate, meaning that the rising background sea level is a fairly good guide to how extremes are increasing. 
This trend will continue in the future, although more energetic storm systems may also cause larger storm surges and hence higher rates of extreme sea levels in some places. More frequent storms are also set to make extreme sea-level events more common.
By 2100, global average sea level is projected to rise by 0.28-0.61m, relative to the period 1986-2005, if this century’s global warming can be held to about 1℃. But if greenhouse emissions continue to increase at their current rate, the world is in line for sea-level rises of 0.52-0.98m. 
This rise will not be uniform around Australia’s coastline. The east coast is likely to experience up to 6cm more sea-level rise than the global average by 2100, because of the expected warming and strengthening of the East Australian Current.
Trends in Australia’s weather and waves are harder to predict. Satellite measurements over the past 30 years suggest that waves are getting slightly higher in the Southern Ocean, and climate models suggest that this may continue. As the tropics continue to expand with climate change, the band of westerly winds over the Southern Ocean will retreat further south and strengthen, whipping up higher waves that will travel to Australia’s southern coast as swell. On the other hand, weakening winds nearer to Australia may help to dampen down wave heights. On Australia’s eastern coast, climate models suggest fewer large wave events due to decreasing storminess in the Tasman Sea in the future. 
A significant challenge we face is not having the data available to monitor the changes along our southern coastline. Australia has the longest east-west continental shelf in the world, but we have only a handful of wave buoys to measure these processes; much of the coastline is not monitored despite widespread coastal management concerns.
Our understanding of extreme sea-level change in Australia is also limited by available tide gauge coverage. Only two digital tide gauge records (in Fremantle and Fort Denison) extend back to at least the early 20th century, and records elsewhere around the coast typically span less than 50 years. 
However, our investigation discovered that there is an opportunity to increase the length of available records by digitising old paper tide gauge charts. This could extend several records along our southern and tropical coastlines.
We also have major gaps in our knowledge about how our coastlines will be changed by flooding and erosion. The simple methods used to predict coastal erosion may underestimate erosion significantly, particularly in estuaries. 
Given the considerable urban infrastructure located within estuaries, and the fact that they are vulnerable both to coastal storms and river floods, this is one of the many crucial questions about life on the coast that we still need to answer.
Kathleen McInnes is senior research scientist, CSIRO and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kathleen-mcinnes-303453" target="_blank">here</a>.
Mark Hemer is senior research scientist, Oceans and Atmosphere, CSIRO and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mark-hemer-302723" target="_blank">here</a>.
Ron Hoeke is littoral oceanographer, CSIRO and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ron-hoeke-315391" target="_blank">here</a>.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Hurt by sea: how storm surges and sea-level rise make coastal life risky

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/68068/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Company directors who don’t properly consider climate related risks could be liable for breaching their duty of due care and diligence, a new legal opinion has found. 
Although the alarm for business leaders has been sounding for some time, the release of the opinion by senior barristers and leading solicitors confirms the potential liability for Australian company directors.
Australian companies are particularly exposed to the physical, transition and liability risks posed by climate change. The Paris Climate Agreement, which comes into force today, brings the transition risks (and opportunities) forward, given the policy and business changes necessitated by the agreement’s commitment to a sustainable economy.
Directors’ liability hinges on the foreseeability of risks or opportunities material to the best interests of the company. Courts have long experience of finding fault for inadequate responses to foreseeable risks, even where there is supposed uncertainty. Examples of this are when health risks associated with HIV and asbestos were improperly understood or managed. A defendant can be liable even though they are ignorant, if a reasonable person would have known about them. 
Some corporate leaders might want to hit the snooze button again, but today’s challenges to business as usual are acute. The long foreseen economic and environmental impacts of a changing climate are intensifying. Legally, any excuse that prior uncertainty about the science or impacts of climate change may have previously afforded directors has expired. 
Corporate leadership ignoring interdependent economic, social and environmental risks and drivers of value has never been a sustainable long term strategy. Here are four reasons why there is only upside for business leaders to change course:
1. Markets are supporting the transition
Investors are demanding better information about companies’ carbon emissions and risk management strategies so they can properly understand the near and long term prospects of the companies they are investing in. Increasingly, they are getting it. Large institutional investors like BlackRock have led the charge on board-level management of climate and other sustainability risks.
Underpinned by better information, new opportunities are being supported by financial instruments such as green bonds or government backed financing for clean technology or renewable energy projects. Such instruments help capital flow towards investments that are consistent with decarbonisation of the economy in the longer term. 
These initiatives are being reinforced by economy-wide measures like carbon pricing schemes to ensure that market prices reflect true costs of emissions-intensive activities. The latest example is Canada’s decision to impose a benchmark price on carbon pollution. 
Under this plan, Canadian provinces can decide how the revenue raised is spent, but are required to have an effective price of C$10 per tonne of carbon pollution in 2018, rising by C$10 each year to C$50 per tonne in 2022. 
2. Risk disclosure will improve and converge
Michael Bloomberg’s Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosureswill update its (voluntary, business-led) framework for climate risk disclosure in December 2016. This is the next step in accelerated global efforts to increase transparency of physical, liability and transition risks. 
In Australia, enhanced ASX guidelines, which commenced in July 2014, require listed entities to disclose any exposure to economic, environmental and social sustainability risks, and how such risks will be managed. 
Calls to renew the lapsed Senate Economics Committee inquiry into carbon risk disclosure have been answered; the committee will report in early 2017.
However, significant issues remain around consistency and comparability of disclosures. The level of variation of disclosure of carbon-related and other sustainability risks by entities in the same sector, including Australia’s banks, is concerning. 
3. Regulators are focusing more on climate risk
Global regulators are stepping up supervision of firms exposed to disruptive climate related changes in asset prices, technology, and policy. Bank of England Governor Mark Carney, said that regulators and investors expect much more than “static” disclosure of risks.
Australian regulators are sending similar signals that more sophisticated stress testing and scenario-based analysis of climate related risks will be par for the course.
4. Better political dynamics
With the Paris targets locked in, more ambitious national policy settings needed to deliver them will not be far away. Years of policy reversals and missteps domestically and globally have been replaced by the policy certainty business craves. 
Pressure from Australian businesses for the government to take ambitious commitments to Paris in 2015, including through the Australian Climate Roundtable, is a sign the game has shifted, albeit after years of diversion and delay for which business leaders share some responsibility. 
This trend was reinforced when NSW became the latest state governmentto commit to a net zero emissions target by 2050. Policy changes inevitably create transition risks. But by supporting the implementation of effective, proactive policy, business can reduce the risks of sharper and unpredictable responses later.
Corporate governance will be tested against this backdrop. The implications are clear: at a minimum, where they are not already, climate and other sustainability issues must be elevated to the board level. Boards must establish the information channels, governance processes and technical capabilities. They must also be able to cultivate shareholder support for effective long-term strategies, rather than short-term sugar hits.
The coming into force of the Paris Climate Agreement promises to be a historic global tipping point in accelerating the transition to a net zero carbon economy. The release of this legal research on directors’ duties is a timely and powerful reminder of the risks, opportunities – and responsibilities – which Australian company directors face in addressing this challenge.
Travers McLeod is honorary fellow in the School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Melbourne and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/travers-mcleod-44584" target="_blank">here</a>.
John Wiseman is professorial fellow, University of Melbourne and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-wiseman-252" target="_blank">here</a>.
Both are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Property 101: Company directors can be held legally liable for ignoring the risks from climate change

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67629/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The most recent report card on the Great Barrier Reef’s water quality highlighted major changes that need to be made to meet targets by 2018. 
Sediment and pollutant runoff from land use have increased 2-3 fold since 1850, largely driven by agricultural land clearing and grazing, while fertiliser used in sugar cane farming contributes to nitrogen runoff.
Runoff increases coral’s sensitivity to bleaching and disease, shifts the balance between coral and algae, leads to a build-up of pollutants in marine species that are long-lived or high in the food web, and increases the chances of crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks.
Improving water quality will likely increase the health of reef organisms, and help reefs to bounce back from disturbances. 
Government investment plans need to account properly for the total estimated value of the Great Barrier Reef and past progress in reducing runoff. An estimated A$500 million per year is needed to improve management action. 
So what’s the best way to meet these targets? You won’t be surprised to find that scientists are working on the answer. But innovative projects fusing art and science are also appearing in north Queensland. 
<h2>The problem of collective action</h2>
Like many environmental issues, runoff on the Great Barrier Reef is a classic example of a collective action problem. Collective action is at the heart of this issue in two ways. 
First, the alongshore transport of sediment and runoff pollutants by currents means that the effects of managing runoff along one section of coastline may be felt elsewhere. The condition of the reef adjacent to a particular river mouth may not, therefore, necessarily reflect the land management within that river’s catchment. 
Second, the health of the reef is dependent on other factors, such as bleaching driven by increased sea surface temperatures related to climate change. These are caused by many geographically remote activities (for instance, someone burning coal in London). 
Collective action problems can be understood through US academic Garret Hardin’s famous “tragedy of the commons” theory. This theory states that self-interested individuals acting rationally may not behave in the best interests of the whole group.
Hardin used the example of a group of herdsmen allowing their cattle to graze a pasture that is running out of fodder. For an individual herdsman, the cost of removing cattle exceeds the benefit of leaving some pasture for the future, unless other herdsmen also agree to remove cattle.
Similarly, it takes an exceptional individual to reduce their runoff impacts, in light of the agricultural benefits to be gained from activities that increase runoff volume and decrease its quality (such as land clearing and use of fertilizers). This is particularly the case when others are not acting to abate their own activities. 
Many farmers say that the Reef 2050 target to reduce runoff by 80% by 2025 is not economically viable. But without acting now, our metaphorical common (the inshore Great Barrier Reef) will continue to degrade.
<h2>Best environmental practice</h2>
Agriculture is a social and cultural activity, just as much as it is a process of environmental engineering, and the push to transform farming practices needs to recognise this. Top down incentive schemes do have some impact, but could there be a better way?
For instance, for sugar cane growers, the Smartcane Best Management Practice (BMP) Guidelines are an attempt by the industry to shift farming practices towards compliance with government directives to reduce run-off impacts on the reef. 
The Smartcane BMP guidelines aim to improve farming practices through seven principles:
<ol>
<li>
Soil health and plant nutrition management 
</li>
<li>
Pest, disease and weed management 
</li>
<li>
Drainage and irrigation management 
</li>
<li>
Crop production and harvest management
</li>
<li>
Natural systems management
</li>
<li>
Farm business management
</li>
<li>
Workplace health and safety management
</li>
</ol>
As with many corporate social responsibility initiatives, growers who volunteer for Smartcane BMP are required to assess their current practices and set benchmarks for improvement in order to receive accreditation that indicates good environmental practice. There are clear marketing and, in many cases, cost-cutting benefits that motivate farmers to participate. 
This has driven some examples of good practice within the farming community. However, as the 2015 report card shows, “only 23% of sugarcane land was managed using best management practice systems”, which is inadequate for achieving the Reef 2050 goal of an 80% reduction in dissolved nitrogen loads from agricultural runoff by 2025. 
<h2>Motivating farmers</h2>
One project which engages with this problem is Sugar vs the Reef? by artists Lucas Ihlein, Kim Williams and Ian Milliss. This project is based on the idea that there is a greater chance of influencing farming practices if the desire to improve environmental performance comes from within the farming community. Innovation is celebrated from below by staging public collaborative events to generate dialogue about agriculture’s complex social and environmental interactions. 
For example, over the next two years, the project will coordinate a collaboration between Mackay Botanical Gardens, sugar cane farmers and community members to plant a dual crop of sunflowers and sugar caneas a highly visible work of “land art”.
This crop - whose cycle of planting, growth and harvesting will exceed the minimum standards of BMP - will stretch over four hectares near the centre of Mackay. Over two years, the project will engage sugarcane farmers, artists, high school students, members of the Australian South Sea Islander community, the Greater Whitsunday Food Network, soil and reef scientists, as well as the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.
While it is easy to point the finger at agricultural practices as a major cause of poor water quality in the inner waters of the Great Barrier Reef, change will be slow until the complex social factors that shape modern farming are recognised. This requires deeper engagement with the varied cultures of farming.
Sarah Hamylton is senior lecturer, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Wollongong and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-hamylton-134715" target="_blank">here</a>.
Lucas Ihlein is ARC DECRA research fellow, University of Wollongong and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lucas-ihlein-112028" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Cleaning up runoff onto the Great Barrier Reef: how art and science are inspiring farmers to help

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/68172/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVERS
Droughts are a natural feature of the Australian environment. But the Millennium drought (or “Big Dry”), which ran from 1997 to 2010, was a wake-up call even by our parched standards. 
The Millennium drought had major social, economic and environmental impacts. It triggered water restrictions in major cities, and prompted severe reductions in irrigation allocations throughout the vast Murray-Darling Basin.
The Millennium drought also highlighted that, compared to the rest of the world, the impacts of drought on Australia’s society and economy are particularly severe. This is mainly because our water storage and supply systems were originally designed by European settlers who failed to plan for the huge variability in Australia’s climate.
<h2>Have we learned the lessons?</h2>
Are we likely to fare any better when the next Big Dry hits? It’s important to reflect on how much we actually understand drought in Australia, and what we might expect in the future.
Our study, part of the Australian Water and Energy Exchanges Initiative (OzEWEX), had two aims related to this question. The first was to document what is known and unknown about drought in Australia. The second aim was to establish how Australia’s scientists and engineers can best investigate those unknowns.
The fact is that despite their significance, droughts are generally still poorly understood. This makes it hard to come up with practical, effective strategies for dealing with them when they strike. 
One reason for this is that unlike natural hazards with more graphic and measurable impacts (such as floods, cyclones, and bushfires), droughts develop gradually over huge areas, and can last for years. Often they go unnoticed until they trigger widespread water or food shortages, or cause significant energy, economic, health or environmental issues. 
Drought has been described as a “creeping disaster”, because by the time a drought is identified, it is usually already well under way, the costs to fix it are mounting, and the opportunity to take proactive action has already been missed. 
This is complicated still further by the uncertainties around defining, monitoring and forecasting drought – including predicting when a drought will finally end. As in the case of other natural hazards (such as drought’s polar opposite, floods), what we need most is accurate and practically useful information on the likelihood, causes and consequences of droughts in particular areas. 
This is a very tricky question, not least because we still need to come up with a rigorous way to distinguish between correlation and causation. For example, are increased local temperatures a cause or a consequence of drought? 
The complications don’t end there. Because droughts are so much slower and bigger than other natural disasters, they therefore have much more complicated effects on agriculture, industry and society. Bushfires can be devastating, but they also offer ample opportunities to learn lessons for the next time. Droughts, in contrast, give us limited opportunities to learn how best to prepare. 
Yet prepare we must. Given Australia’s history of decades-long swings between wet and dry, and the fact that these swings are projected to grow even stronger, drought will be a key concern for Australia for a long time to come.
<h2>What to do next</h2>
We therefore make several recommendations to help boost our understanding and management of drought. 
1). Reconsider the way drought is defined and monitored to remove confusion between drought causes, impacts and risks. Similarly, there is also a need to better distinguish between drought, aridity, and water scarcity due to over-extractions. 
The simplest definition of “drought” is a deficit of water compared with normal conditions. But what is normal? How long does the deficit have to persist, and how severe does it need to be, to be considered a drought? What is meant by water: rainfall, snow, ice, streamflow, water in a storage reservoir, groundwater, soil moisture, or all of these? 
The answers to these questions depend very much on the local situation in terms of climate and water use, which varies significantly in space and time and is why the simplest definition of drought is insufficient. We need to develop drought definitions that clearly differentiate drought from long-term changes in aridity and water scarcity, and that capture drought start, duration, magnitude and spatial extent. Such definitions should account for the differences between Australia’s climate zones, the wide variety of end-users and applications of drought monitoring information, and the diversity of droughts that have occurred in the past. There needs to be a common understanding of what a drought is and the differences between drought, aridity and human-induced water scarcity.
2). Improve documentation of droughts that took place before weather records began, in roughly 1900. This will improve our understanding of Australia’s long-term “baseline” drought characteristics (that is, how bad can droughts get? how does the worst drought on record compare with the worst that has ever occurred?), and thus provide the fundamental information needed to successfully manage droughts. 
This requires compilation of longer-term and more spatially complete drought histories via the merging of palaeoclimate information with instrumental, satellite, and reanalysis data. This will help us better understand instrumental and pre-instrumental drought behaviour, and put the droughts observed in the instrumental record into context. This work will involve looking at ice cores, tree rings, different tree rings, cave deposits, corals, sediments and historical changes to river channels and floodplains.
3). Improve drought forecasting by developing more realistic models of the many factors that cause (or contribute to) drought. This will help us separate out the influences of natural variability and human-induced climate change, which in turn will help us make more accurate long-term projections.
If we can answer these big research questions, we will all be better prepared when the next big dry inevitably arrives.
Anthony Kiem is associate professor – Hydroclimatology, University of Newcastle and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/anthony-kiem-259458" target="_blank">here</a>.
Fiona Johnson is senior lecturer, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UNSW Australia and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/fiona-johnson-313721" target="_blank">here</a>.
Seth Westra is associate professor, School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Adelaide and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/seth-westra-19720" target="_blank">here</a>.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

The lessons we need to learn to deal with the ‘creeping disaster’ of drought

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Stockland has been awarded a position on the Climate A List by CDP, the international not-for-profit that drives sustainable economies.
There are 193 “A Listers” on the list.
Thousands of companies submit annual climate disclosures to CDP for independent assessment against its scoring methodology.
Stockland is among 9 percent of corporations participating in CDP’s climate change program to be awarded a position on the Climate A List, in recognition of its actions to reduce emissions and mitigate climate change in the past reporting year.
Stockland has achieved an unprecedented triple crown.
Stockland is the current S&amp;P Dow Jones Sustainability Indices (DJSI) Global Real Estate Sector Leader and also achieved Global Sector and Regional Sector Leader status in the 2016 Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark (GRESB) survey in the category Diversified - Retail/Office.
Mark Steinert, Managing Director and CEO at Stockland, said their company purpose was to "create a better way to live." 
The Climate A List is released in CDP’s Out of the starting blocks: Tracking progress on corporate climate action report today.
The report, which establishes the baseline for corporate climate action, reveals that global corporations have started the transition to a low-carbon economy and some are already capitalizing on the opportunities this affords.
Companies’ progress on reducing emissions in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement will be tracked against this baseline in future annual reports.
Stockland’s key achievements and priorities included:
- Commitment to design and technology innovation and access to alternative energy supplies that help us and our customers realise a cost-efficient, low carbon future.
- Focus on incorporating alternative energy, particularly solar photo-voltaic power supply, into commercial premises. Solar installations already in place at Shellharbour, Green Hills and Nowra in NSW. Stockland is currently installing a new solar PV system at Wetherill Park in western Sydney.
- A large portion of Stockland’s retirement village homes have solar PV installations.
- Stockland is currently exploring how solar can be adopted at scale within our Residential business, with the investigation of different network ownership and management models underway.
- Stockland has the largest number of Green Star rated retail properties in Australia, as verified by the GBCA.
- In FY16 alone, Stockland’s investment in energy-efficient measures across various commercial property assets are likely to achieve projected energy savings of approximately 1,718,000kWh, which is the equivalent energy saving of removing 255 passenger vehicles from the road for an entire year.
- Stockland has prioritised the development of Australian and world’s best practice Green Star residential communities across the nation, and the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA) has rewarded the company’s leading approach to sustainability and liveability.
- The GBCA has accredited six Stockland communities in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth with either 5 or 6 Star Green Star – Communities ratings. The accreditation assesses and recognises design excellence, innovation, environmental responsibility, potential for future economic prosperity and liveability within each community.
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Stockland secures triple crown recognition for climate change role

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/65730/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Spring arrives and the warming weather encourages the plants in our gardens and parks to burst into life, commencing their annual reproductive cycle.
Plants use cues from the weather and climate to time their growth, flowering and fruiting. But as the world heats up due to climate change, these patterns are changing. 
So how is climate change affecting our gardens, and what can we do about it?
<h2>In sync with climate</h2>
Many temperate plants have evolved to reproduce in spring to avoid damage from extreme cold or heat. Warmer conditions tend to speed up these processes, causing plants to grow faster. 
Plants have evolved sophisticated mechanisms to synchronise with climate. This means they are excellent bio-indicators of climate change. 
We know from global assessments that most plants studied so far are behaving as we’d expect them to in a warming world. Studies in the Southern Hemisphere have found the same. 
In Australia, plants in southern Australia are maturing earlier – winegrapes, for instance, by 27 days on average between 1999 and 2007. We can see this in wine growers’ records.
Other plants may behave differently. Fruit trees such as apples need cold weather to break buds from their dormant state, before commencing growth when warm temperatures arrive. 
This means after warm winters, such as this one, flowering may actually be delayed. Data from a recent study show potentially delayed flowering for Pink Lady® apples. 
Applethorpe had the warmest spring and flowered first, as we’d expect for most plants. But Manjimup had the second-warmest spring and flowered last, even after Huon, the coldest spring site. This seems counter-intuitive but the delay is likely because Manjimup had the warmest winter. 
<h2>Do these changes matter?</h2>
The earlier emergence of reproductive tissues may increase the risk of devastating frost damage. Contrary to what you might expect, evidenceshows recent warming in southern Australia has not necessarily led to fewer frosts. On the other hand, plants that delay flowering because of warmer winters may reduce their frost risk. 
Shifts in flowering timing, earlier or later, can be problematic for plants that rely on pollination between different varieties. Both varieties must shift flowering in the same way for flowering periods to overlap. If flowering times don’t overlap, pollination will be less successful, producing fewer fruit. 
Bee and bird pollinators must also adjust their activity in sync with changes to flowering time to facilitate pollination. 
Faster maturity may shift ripening into hotter times of year, as seen for wine grapes. This increases the risk of extreme heat damage.
<h2>What about other changes?</h2>
Pests and diseases will also adjust their growth cycles in response to a changing climate. One pest well known to gardeners is the Queensland Fruit Fly (QFF). Their maggots are found in a wide range of fruits. 
Climate change will likely favour fruit flies. Warmer temperatures for longer periods will encourage a higher number of generations each year. Meanwhile, reduced cold weather will mean fewer fruit flies will die, increasing the flies’ survival rates. 
On the other hand, temperate pests and diseases may decrease if warming exceeds their temperature thresholds.
<h2>What can you do?</h2>
What have you observed? Citizen scientists who track the timing of biological events have provided valuable information, especially in Australia, for us to monitor and interpret plant responses to climate change. Keeping garden records will show if and how your plants or pests are changing their patterns. 
If you observe your flowers emerging earlier, coverings can be used to protect against frost. Keep an eye on cross-pollinators – are they flowering together? If not, consider planting a different cross-pollinator. 
Nets are an effective way to reduce heat damage and can also be used to protect against some pests. Setting pest traps according to weather rather than the calendar will help disrupt the first generation and reduce pest impact.
Climate change has already influenced biological responses, perhaps even in your own garden. Seeing these changes in our gardens gives us an insight into the significant challenges faced by our food production systems under a changing climate. 
Adapting to current and future climate change is a reality, and is essential to preserve both the enjoyment we experience in our own gardens and the security of future food supply.
Rebecca Darbyshire is research officer, Climate Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries and Lecturer, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rebecca-darbyshire-301038" target="_blank">here</a>.
Snow Barlow is foundation professor of Horticulture and Viticulture, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/snow-barlow-256" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Climate change

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Climate change

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News