A collection of just 25 large-format apartments and penthouses overlooking Goodwin Park is entering the Coolangatta market, with <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/marea-residences-coolangatta-27-27a-dixon-street-coolangatta-qld-4225">Maréa Residences</a> combining a low-density, residential-only approach with uninterrupted park and Pacific Ocean outlooks.

Located at 27 Dixon Street, Maréa comprises three and four-bedroom residences alongside a limited number of dual-level penthouses, with the project positioned between Goodwin Park and <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/coolangatta-qld-4225">Coolangatta</a>’s coastal precinct.

Construction has commenced, with completion currently estimated for late 2027. Three-bedroom residences are priced from $1.8 million.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150999 project_image_fid=374005]

The project has been designed around its northern outlook across the park, with the building’s architecture, landscaping and material palette intended to establish a connection with the neighbouring green space. The residences have been configured to maximise natural light and views across Goodwin Park towards the ocean.

Inside, the material palette incorporates timber, stone and brushed brass, complemented by curved detailing and ambient lighting. Kitchens and bathrooms carry the same natural material approach, while residences also include basement parking, storage and lift access.

Maréa’s penthouses are arranged over two levels and include private pools, adding another layer to the project’s focus on larger-format apartment living. Across the development, residences are configured with three or four bedrooms rather than the broader mix of smaller apartment types commonly found in larger projects.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150999 project_image_fid=374010]

Resident amenity is concentrated at rooftop level, where landscaped entertaining terraces and pools take advantage of elevated views across Coolangatta and the Pacific Ocean.

The project has so far been particularly well received by local owner-occupiers and downsizers, according to Urban Activation Property Sales and Marketing Director Matt George, with the residential-only format, construction quality and northern park outlook among the features resonating with purchasers.

“The uninterrupted northern aspect overlooking Goodwin Park has been a key point of difference, with buyers attracted to the sense of serenity and open space the park provides, while still enjoying easy access to the ocean and being within walking distance of the lifestyle and amenities Coolangatta has to offer,” George said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150999 project_image_fid=374002]

“The combination of high-quality construction, a residential-only building, park outlook and proximity to the beach has resonated strongly with the local downsizer market.”

The Dixon Street address is within walking distance of Coolangatta Beach and the broader southern Gold Coast coastline, including the surf breaks at Snapper Rocks and Kirra. Coolangatta’s cafés, restaurants and retail are nearby, while Gold Coast Airport is also within close proximity.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150999]

Joel Robinson

Maréa Residences brings parkside apartments to Coolangatta

Melbourne developer PDG has secured Victorian Government approval for its $1.5 billion Southbank development <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-one-1-queens-bridge-street-southbank-vic-3006">The One</a>, clearing the way for the long-dormant riverfront site opposite Crown to finally be developed.

The Minister for Planning has approved the project at 1-29 Queens Bridge Street, with the Department of Transport and Planning issuing the planning permit following its assessment.

The approval will allow PDG to develop the prominent 5,059 sqm site with a major mixed-use tower comprising premium apartments, including branded residences, a luxury hotel and boutique office space.

PDG acquired the site in late 2024, with its position directly opposite Crown's main entrance and near Melbourne's Arts Precinct making it one of Southbank's most significant remaining development opportunities.

<img alt="PDG" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="3933013e-6332-4386-b9be-089df05caf17" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-27%20at%209.29.22%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=sITIgBqDL0N3VNSMwWEmF5UA.uvcsRyu" />

Designed by COX in collaboration with ODO and PDG, the tower's architecture draws on the movement of the Yarra River, with six vertical pleats running the height of the sculpted facade.

The project will also see the heritage-listed Queens Bridge Hotel restored and incorporated into the development&nbsp;with new hospitality and public uses, including a rooftop venue.

A significant component of The One will be its residential amenity.

More than 5,000 sqm of resident facilities will be delivered across a single level, making it one of the largest consolidated residential amenity offerings proposed in an Australian apartment development.

The planning approval also incorporates a major upgrade of Queensbridge Square, which PDG will deliver in partnership with the City of Melbourne.

<img alt="PDG" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="73167fcd-1031-4b6f-a408-a064cfe45ed1" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-27%20at%209.29.17%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=Pf1AEWxw6SNmBqR0zQW5lyEze.MtxgFp" />

The existing square will be revitalised as a new civic and pedestrian space along the Yarra River, strengthening the connection between the project, Southbank and the riverfront.

PDG Founder and Managing Director Vince Giuliano said the approval represented a major milestone for a site which has remained largely underutilised for more than 15 years.

“This is the most significant Planning Permit approval Melbourne has seen in recent years,” Giuliano said.

“For more than 15 years, this site has remained underutilised. This approval enables us to deliver a project that will contribute meaningfully to the revitalisation of Southbank, restore and reactivate an important heritage building, and create a new civic and hospitality destination for Melbourne.”

The latest approval follows an earlier planning permit issued by the City of Melbourne covering demolition works across part of the site at 9-29 Queens Bridge Street. Those demolition and early works are already underway.

PDG has also started generating early interest in the residential component from owner-occupiers ahead of a planned public launch in early 2027.

PDG secures approval for $1.5bn Southbank apartment development, The One

Local developer Harridan is seeking to turn its Woolloongabba apartment project into the first stage of a broader transformation of Burke Street, using a new 16-storey mixed-use building to establish a greener pedestrian connection toward the rapidly evolving Boggo Road transport and knowledge precinct.

The South East Queensland developer has filed plans for 154 apartments on the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/4-burke-street-woolloongabba-qld-4102">southern side of Burke Street</a>, where its proposal has been designed alongside a wider vision by LatStudios for the street.

That vision positions the southern side of Burke Street for buildings of 15 storeys and above, while envisaging lower-rise development of up to five storeys on the northern side to transition into Woolloongabba's existing character housing. It also proposes wider pedestrian verges, deep planting, new street trees and upgrades to the pedestrian approach to Boggo Road Station.

The Harridan development itself has been designed by Brisbane-based Arqus Design and will comprise 154 apartments across 16 storeys. The mix is weighted heavily toward two-bedroom apartments, with 121 proposed alongside 10 one-bedroom and 23 three-bedroom residences. There will typically be around 14 units per floor.

A lower-ground car park and three podium levels will accommodate 156 resident parking spaces, along with visitor and commercial parking. There will also be 154 resident bicycle spaces and 40 visitor bicycle parks.

&nbsp;

Harridan is a family-owned developer and part of the Holmwood Highgate Group, with more than three decades of development activity across South East Queensland. Its portfolio spans residential, commercial and industrial property, with current residential projects including Riverbank on Byron in Bulimba, Esperance Residences in Carina and The Precinct at Kinross Road in Thornlands.

Wooloongabba has been popular for apartment developers, particularly since the announcement of the 2032 Summer Olympics games in Brisbane.

While there have been a lot of development applications, it has failed to materialize into real supply.&nbsp;

Sarazin has been the major player in the area. They are under construction at Murcia Residences, on the fringe of East Brisbane and Woolloongabba. They have just launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-stanley-residences-woolloongabba-8-trafalgar-street-woolloongabba-qld-4102">The Stanley Residences</a>, in Woolloongabba on Trafalagar Street. They also have Nuage coming soon on the nearby <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/nuage-woolloongabba-14-wellington-road-woolloongabba-qld-4102">Wellington Road</a>.

First look: Harridan plans Burke Street transformation beside Boggo Road transport hub

IN BRIEF

<ul>
	<li>
	Just three double-storey Sky Homes sit at the top of The Waterline, each with its own private marina berth and rooftop terrace.
	</li>
	<li>
	Construction on The Waterline is complete, with the first residents expected to move in from mid-October.
	</li>
	<li>
	Sky Homes range from 282 sqm to 367 sqm and are priced from $3.65 million.
	</li>
</ul>

<hr />
Lewis Land has opened the first completed sky home for inspection at Harbour Shores, giving buyers their first opportunity to step inside one of just three double-storey residences crowning The Waterline.

Each sky home comes with its own private marina berth, rooftop terrace and Broadwater views, combining the scale of a larger home with direct access to the boating lifestyle that underpins the wider <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/harbour-shores-biggera-waters-564-oxley-drive-biggera-waters-qld-4216">Harbour Shores</a> masterplan.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=113271 project_image_fid=366708]

Lewis Land Head of Development Michael Long said the inclusion of a berth with every Sky Home had become increasingly valuable as marina access across the Gold Coast tightened.

“Marina berths are becoming increasingly difficult to secure across the Gold Coast, so including one with every Sky Home makes this a genuinely rare offering,” Long said.

“The private 70-berth marina will accommodate boats up to 12 metres in length and is positioned just 2.5 kilometres from the Broadwater, placing the open ocean only 15 minutes away.

“Being able to step out of your home onto your boat is a rare luxury, and it’s something residents here can look forward to when it opens later this year.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=113271 project_image_fid=366709]

The display opening comes as construction completes on The Waterline, with the first residents expected to move in from mid-October.

The three Sky Homes range from 282 sqm to 367 sqm and each feature three bedrooms, three bathrooms, multiple living zones, expansive kitchens with butler's pantries and large balconies taking in the Broadwater outlook.

Each residence also has three secure basement car spaces and additional storage.

“This is the first opportunity the Gold Coast has had to step into Harbour Shores and see, touch and feel what we’re bringing to life here,” Long said.

“There are only three Sky Homes within The Waterline, ranging in size from 282sqm to 367sqm, with each residence featuring three large bedrooms, three bathrooms, multiple living zones, expansive custom-built kitchens with butler’s pantry, and large balconies capturing Broadwater views.”

<img alt="Harbour Shores" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="bab65e10-4fab-45e1-92d8-fc56e2ab98ff" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-25%20at%202.00.16%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=XT8q76LsPkw3cYTsvN3JfFDaPLud90PN" />

Residents of The Waterline will have access to a private pool, along with Harbour Shores' wider collection of amenity including a lagoon pool, social clubhouse, tennis court, gym, yoga facilities and sauna.

Lewis Land partnered with Studio Collective to furnish the completed display, with the interiors designed to demonstrate how the residences could function as permanent homes rather than simply as show apartments.

Studio Collective Director Melissa Park said the surrounding waterways informed the interiors, but in a more restrained way than a traditional coastal scheme.

“We drew inspiration from the canals and coastal surrounds, but our approach was to interpret that subtly through layered materials and a grounded palette of earthy tones, rather than literal coastal references,” Park said.

“We introduced hero moments of green and teal to reference the surrounding waterways, while mirrored elements help reflect natural light.

“The result is a residence that feels elevated yet comfortable, somewhere buyers can genuinely imagine themselves living, entertaining and unwinding.”

Sky Homes are priced from $3.65 million.

Lewis Land is also offering private marina berths with The Residences, its limited collection of three and four-bedroom villas positioned directly along the Harbour Shores waterfront boardwalk.

Three-bedroom villas are priced from $2.99 million, while four-bedroom residences start from $3.19 million.

Harbour Shores is being marketed by Colliers International.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=113271]

Lewis Land opens sky home display as The Waterline completes at Harbour Shores

St Vincent de Paul Society Housing Australia has filed plans for a major mixed-use housing precinct on the southern edge of the North Sydney CBD, adding another significant proposal to a pocket around North Sydn​ey Station that is quickly becoming one of the LGA's busiest development zones.

The State Significant Development Application covers a 5,990 sqm site at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/1-19-mackenzie-street-lavender-bay-nsw-2060">1-19 MacKenzie Street and 211 Blues Point Road in Lavender Bay</a>, immediately south of Nor​th Sydney Station and between the commercial core and the lower-rise Lavender Bay Heritage Conservation Area.

Designed by Wardle, the proposal would deliver a new residential tower comprising 88 build-to-sell apartments and 19 affordable apartments, alongside a separate co-living building with 57 rooms and a building manager's studio.

It would also see the significant restoration and upgrade of St Francis Xavier Catholic Church, the adaptive reuse of the former school building, new parish facilities, retail, a new public square and around 1,000 sqm of publicly accessible open space.

<img alt="Vinnies North Sydney" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d5dd7f87-a617-463e-b577-17541e01f0e9" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%209.10.13%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=4R8TsFN3P_LrrXO2HswTOIrx2blil8lh" />

The project is seeking a concurrent rezoning of the site to R4 High Density Residential and an increase in the maximum building height to allow a tower reaching RL120, or up to 20 storeys. The proposal was progressed through the NSW Government's Housing Delivery Authority pathway.

The build-to-sell component will be weighted toward larger apartments, with just six one-bedroom apartments compared with 31 two-beds, 43 three-beds and eight four-bedroom residences.

The 19 affordable apartments will comprise two studios, 15 one-bedroom apartments and two two-bedroom apartments, taking the total apartment component to 107 residences before the 58 co-living rooms are included.

<img alt="Vnnies" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="7d568ca5-cb90-4e18-96c6-d9795dba0c56" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%209.10.05%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=GY2R5M9VtQh0EKy1vajaea19PSLOPuRD" />

Wardle's design for the Vinnies site has sought to negotiate that emerging high-rise context while retaining the lower-scale character of MacKenzie Street and the adjoining heritage conservation area.

The main building adopts a three-storey podium and tower arrangement, with the podium aligned to the ridgeline and front setback of St Francis Xavier Church.&nbsp;Wardle has designed the podium with colonnades, seating, recessed entries and active ground-floor frontages, with sandstone-toned precast concrete and face brick referencing the materiality of the existing church.

The tower then steps back eight metres to the south and six metres to the north before rising in a sculpted form comprising four interlocking quadrants. Wardle has also introduced rounded forms and chamfered corners to reduce the tower's perceived bulk and improve view sharing with neighbouring development sites.

Resident facilities and outdoor areas are planned at the separation between the podium and tower at Level 3, oriented toward Sydney Harbour and the CBD skyline.

The tower itself will feature a glass reinforced concrete facade, with recessed balconies and deep reveals used both to provide shading and privacy and frame views toward the harbour and city. The lower levels take a different architectural approach, using brick and sandstone-toned finishes intended to establish a stronger relationship with St Francis Xavier Church. The Church itself will be conserved and upgraded for its continued use, while the former school building will be adaptively reused as part of the co-living component.

<img alt="Lavendar Bay" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2d4418ad-90aa-4d49-af93-c80b140aea80" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%209.09.47%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=Kv4gzbsACaGvZSRuaqcfGC54jEJRXIDJ" />

&nbsp;

The proposal adds to an increasingly concentrated pipeline of residential development around Blue Street, MacKenzie Street and Lavender Bay.

Just west of the site, Central Element lodged plans earlier this year for one of the most significant residential developments proposed in Lavender Bay in recent years.

Central Element's SJB-designed scheme at 64-66 Lavender Street and 3-7 Middlemiss Street would deliver 163 apartments across two towers rising 23 and 32 storeys, replacing five existing apartment buildings containing 32 homes. The project also forms part of the Housing Delivery Authority pathway.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-central-element-reveals-lavender-bay-apartment-plans?utm_source=chatgpt.com" rel="noopener" target="_blank">First look: Central Element reveals Lavender Bay apartment plans</a>

Immediately around North Sy​dney Station, another two significant proposals have emerged at 5 and 15 Blue Street.

Zurich Australian Insurance Properties is seeking to adaptively reuse its longstanding commercial building at 5 Blue Street, directly above North Sydney Station, rather than demolishing the structure.

Its SSDA proposes converting the building into a 14-storey mixed-use development with 62 apartments and 86 co-living rooms, together with ground-floor retail and a major refurbishment of Blue Street Plaza. The application is currently at the Response to Submissions stage.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-zurich-targets-north-sydney-office-conversion-with-148-unit-proposal-above-metro-station">First look: Zurich targets North Sydney office conversion with 148-unit proposal above Metro station</a>

&nbsp;

First look: Vinnies files for 20-storey Lavender Bay apartment tower as North Sydney housing pocket heats up

Environment

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/68170/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Recent floods in New South Wales, South Australia and Victoria have reminded us of the power of our weather and rivers to wreak havoc on homes, business and even, tragically, lives. 
As Dorothea Mackellar poetically pointed out, “droughts and flooding rains” have been a feature of Australia throughout history, so maybe we shouldn’t be all that surprised when they happen.
However, we also know that the reported costs of flooding in Australia have been increasing, most likely through a combination of increased reporting, increased exposure through land use change and population growth, and changes to flood magnitude and severity. So it is critical that we understand what might be causing these changes.
This was the question we asked in our review on how flood impacts have changed over time in Australia and how they may change in the future. We found that despite decades of research in these areas, there are still many gaps in what we know.
<h2>Copping a soaking</h2>
We know that floods depend not just on how much rain falls, but also on how wet the ground is before a heavy rainfall, and how full the rivers are. We also have evidence that the storms that generate heavy rainfall will become more intense in the future, because as the atmosphere warms it can hold more moisture. 
This is particularly the case for storms that last just a few hours; in fact we think that these storms are the most likely to show the largest increases. In urban environments this translates to an even greater flood risk, because the concrete and hard surfaces allow this intense rain to run off quickly through storm drains and into creeks and rivers, rather than seeping into the landscape.
In larger catchments and rural areas the story is more complicated than in cities. If the soil is very wet as a result of rain over the previous weeks and months, then when a big storm hits there will be a lot of runoff. In contrast, if the soil is dry then flooding is less likely to be a problem. 
Engineers currently use simple models to estimate this relationship between soil wetness and storm rainfall. But our research indicates that these simple models will need to be replaced with longer-term simulations that model all of the previous rainfall leading up to the storm. 
Simple models use simple assumptions to translate rainfall risk into flood risk. But if these assumptions are incorrect, our estimates of flood risk (that is, the probability of a given flood magnitude occurring in any particular year) could be wrong. Flood risk is used to guide infrastructure assessment through cost-benefit ratios, so getting it right is important.
One of the reasons that catchment wetness varies is because of climate cycles like El Niño and La Niña. We have some idea how these and similar ocean cycles affect our climate, including the fact that they can cause fluctations in flood risk over decades-long timescales. 
The difficulty here is that for most locations we only have 50 to 60 years of recorded river flow data. This makes it hard to separate out the influences of these climate cycles from other trends in flood data, such as the effect of increasing urbanisation. 
There has been progressively less monitoring of streamflow in Australia over the past few decades, and this makes it even harder to understand regional changes in flood risk. Governments need to prioritise investment in data collection to allow us to improve our estimates of the risk of flooding and the associated damages now and in the future. 
The recent work by the Bureau of Meteorology to develop a comprehensive set of high quality streamflow gauge data is a step in the right direction, but much more investment is needed in these areas.
Finally, we recommend that continued research into the fundamental changes likely from climate change is required. This requires climate models to be run at a range of resolutions to enable all the important climate processes for extreme rainfall to be properly represented. 
Recent pressure on CSIRO’s climate modelling capabilities is concerning – the scientific questions are by no means fully answered on these topics. It is great to see the recent funding of the ARC Centre of Excellence on Climate Extremes. The work of these researchers, combined with ongoing efforts across Australia, will be important to provide better assessments on climate changes. This can help engineers and hydrologists continue to provide accurate flood risk estimates.
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>.
Christopher J. White is lecturer in Environmental Engineering, University of Tasmania and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/christopher-j-white-272905" 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>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Planning for a rainy day: there’s still lots to learn about Australia’s flood patterns

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Low-energy or zero-energy housing is international best practice, but is still considered costly.
Part of the problem is that studies of housing standards typically use only cost-benefit analysis to assess their value, and so often wrongly conclude that sustainable housing is unaffordable.
Our new research shows how such analyses may miss some flow-on financial benefits – such as reduced energy bills and lower mobility costs. Most importantly, these analyses also overlook effects on householders' health and quality of life arising from factors such as improved thermal comfort.
Sustainable housing can also have important benefits for some of the most vulnerable members of our community, as the report released this week shows.
The environmental performance of Australian housing has improved slowly, associated with changes in minimum building regulations and the creation of subsidies such as solar rebates. This is despite sustainable housing having many documented benefits, including lower (or non-existent) utility bills and greenhouse gas emissions, and improved comfort and health.
Conventional cost-benefit analyses exclude these benefits. That leaves significant gaps in the story that could be used to support investment in sustainable housing.
<h2>What did the study assess?</h2>
Our study involved a three-year, mixed-method evaluation of a small sustainable housing development in Horsham, Victoria. Commissioned by the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the study used both quantitative and qualitative methods, which are rarely combined to assess housing policy and environmental performance.
Four two-bedroom, nine-star-rated (under the National House Energy Rating Scheme, NatHERS) houses were built to maximise passive solar principles. The design elements and technologies used included (partial) reverse brick-veneer construction, double-glazed windows, solar hot water, a 1.5-kilowatt solar photovoltaic system and a shared 5,000-litre rainwater tank.
The houses were built without air conditioning. They do have ceiling fans and gas heating in the living area.
We evaluated these nine-star houses against seven control houses also in Horsham and built to DHHS standards, with a six-star NatHERS rating. We also compared the results to a DHHS technical model of standard industry practice. We conducted a traditional cost-benefit analysis, technical performance analysis (utility consumption, internal temperature), three rounds of interviews with the householders during different seasons, and a personalised household sustainability assessment.
Through a traditional cost-benefit lens, the nine-star housing was not financially viable for DHHS. Even if DHHS was able to capture the savings to the householders, payback was only achieved within 40 years for one of the four dwellings in a high-energy-price future. This was due to higher-than-expected capital costs for the sustainability initiatives.
<a href="/images/2016/08/29/image-20160727-21569-1rlvkw5.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/08/29/image-20160727-21569-1rlvkw5.jpg" alt="">
<h4>
Falling short: the conventional cost-benefit outcome for the nine-star houses. RMIT Centre for Urban Research, DHHS
</h4>
However, resale value could be up to A$40,000 higher per unit. The technical performance analysis also identified significant benefits for the nine-star households. These included reduced utility consumption and bills. One occupant told us:
Look, I haven’t paid any off my power bill in six months and I’m still in credit.
We found that these households:
<ul>
<li>
were A$1,000 a year better off as a result of reduced utility consumption (including solar feed-in tariff);
</li>
<li>
purchased 45 percent less electricity than the control households (and 73 percent less than the standard industry practice);
</li>
<li>
consumed 22 percent less water (30% less than the industry standard);
</li>
<li>
had 40 percent less CO₂ environmental impact from power use (63 percent less than the industry standard); and
</li>
</ul>
<h4><a href="/images/2016/08/29/image-20160728-21558-1mcn2gn.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></h4>
<img src="/images/2016/08/29/image-20160728-21558-1mcn2gn.jpg" alt="">
<h4>
Car equivalent of environmental performance. RMIT Centre for Urban Research, DHHS
</h4>
<ul>
<li>were comfortable with the indoor temperature of their house for 10% more of the time (even without air conditioning).</li>
</ul>
<h4><a href="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/132279/area14mp/image-20160728-21591-wyl97v.png"><img src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/132279/width754/image-20160728-21591-wyl97v.png" alt=""></a></h4>
<h4>
Summary of average annual utilities consumed/generated from each dwelling. RMIT Centre for Urban Research, DHHS
</h4>
Extreme weather events magnified the comfort benefits. On a second consecutive day above 41℃, the nine-star houses were up to 16.6℃ cooler (without air conditioning) compared to the department’s standard six-star house (which had air conditioning).
This meant householders could stay at home during heatwaves rather than needing to seek alternative accommodation, which happened sometimes for the control households. One occupant said:
…in summer I would sit down at the supermarket, you know, because it was cool … [Now] I can stay home and veg out.
<h4><a href="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/132280/area14mp/image-20160728-21574-1kidnxz.jpg"><img src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/132280/width754/image-20160728-21574-1kidnxz.jpg" alt=""></a></h4>
<h4>
Temperature in the living rooms of monitored houses and external temperature for January 18-19, 2013. RMIT Centre for Urban Research, DHHS
</h4>
<h2>Residents confirm well-being benefits</h2>
Interviews with residents highlighted positive social outcomes from living in sustainable housing, which supported the technical data. The benefits they described included improved health and personal finances.
For example, these householders said they had extra spending money due to low (or no) utility bills. This meant they could buy children Christmas presents, avoid personal debt and lay-by, or go on a holiday.
"I do go clothes shopping on occasion now instead of thinking, “Oh God, I have to go and lay-by that.”
Householders described how this led to reduced stress and better mental health.
The research demonstrates that the housing sector’s over-reliance on cost-benefit analysis may be overlooking important benefits (and detriments) of different housing arrangements. Combining qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods can help uncover a more detailed and complete picture of how housing affects people’s lives.
Our research also highlights how sustainable housing benefits extend beyond the environment. These flow-on effects can improve the living conditions of some of the most vulnerable members of society. This, in turn, potentially reduces pressure on health and other support systems and sectors.
<h2>Combining sustainable and affordable housing</h2>
Our study is part of an emerging body of research that challenges the idea that sustainable housing is unaffordable.
The evidence increasingly shows that sustainability and good design can improve affordability when fuller cost-benefit analyses are undertaken and non-monetised social, health and well-being benefits are considered.
To date, however, there is limited “real world” research into people living in sustainable housing, particularly in the affordable housing sector. Without more multidisciplinary evaluations of this kind, we are left with an incomplete picture of the benefits of this type of housing.
Such studies will be critically important as Australia seeks to make the transition to a more sustainable future. Climate change and increased livability costs are likely to add to the challenges for social housing organisations and the tenants who depend on their services.
Trivess Moore is research Fellow, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/trivess-moore-12580" target="_blank">here</a>.
Cecily Maller is vice chancellor's Senior Research Fellow, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/cecily-maller-15732" target="_blank">here</a>.
Ralph Horne is deputy Pro Vice Chancellor, Research &amp; Innovation; Director of UNGC Cities Programme; Professor, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ralph-horne-160543" target="_blank">here</a>.
Yolande Strengers is senior Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yolande-strengers-15350" target="_blank">here</a>.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Sustainable housing’s expensive, right? Not when you look at the whole equation

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Coal’s impact on the Great Barrier Reef by causing climate change is one of the reasons why environmentalists oppose the development of coal fields and exports in Queensland. But fossil fuels could have a more direct impact on the reef and the waters around it, through chemicals produced during their production and distribution.
When coal dust is released in the marine environment it can damage marine ecosystems. Coal contains a number of different chemicals, but it is polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are known carcinogens, that are of most concern.
Some components of coal PAHs cause biochemical changes in fish and can lead to cancer. The coal dust has a very slow degradation rate and will build up in the ecosystem from the continuous input.
Coal dust also absorbs chemicals in the coastal zone and transports things like pesticides and herbicides offshore. Oil spills are another source of PAHs in the marine environment.
It is currently impossible for Australia to assess the impact of these chemicals in marine sediments, because our sediment guidelines are out of date. They need to be updated to match the standards used elsewhere, such as in the United States.
<h2>Coal dust and Great Barrier Reef marine life</h2>
I have previously looked at how far these chemicals can travel from coal ports. I found they can be detected in suspended sediments all the way to the shelf break 200km offshore. (I also published a corrigendum to this paper to correct data errors and to explain how sediment guidelines need to be updated.)
I used the Australian and the US Environment Protection Authority (EPA) sediment quality guidelines to assess the concentration of PAHs in the sediments and suspended sediments on the Great Barrier Reef. The guidelines are meant to indicate “trigger values” for the concentration of possible toxins. If trigger values are reached then sources should be curtailed.
My study showed the concentrations were below toxic levels as then defined by the US guidelines. But it is impossible to know based on the Australian guidelines because these guidelines don’t target the PAHs contained in coal or oil. To explain why, we have to go into a bit of chemistry.
The composition of the PAHs can indicate the source from coal, oil or combustion processes.
The US guidelines use 34 key PAH groups (a total of about 290 individual compounds) and are currently the best available for assessing oil pollution incidents.
The Australian guidelines do not assess the PAHs that are the major contributor to PAHs in coal and oil. The Australian guidelines specify only 20 “parent” PAHs. These guidelines are more relevant to combustion products.
<h2>When is it toxic?</h2>
The Australian guidelines consider PAHs reach toxic levels at 10-50 milligrams per kilogram of sediment. But research suggests this is way too high.
Modern assessments of oil spills now rely on the PAH content of oils in addition to the total oil content.
PAHs make up about 1% of total oil content. If you applied these guidelines to an oil spill, the toxic level of 10mg PAH per kg of sediment would equal 1,000mg of oil per kg. This oil content would kill everything in marine sediments.
For example, I and a colleague published a detailed study of fiddler crabs after the West Falmouth oil spill. We determined that total oil concentrations of 100-200mg oil per kg of sediment were toxic to juvenile crabs. Concentrations of 1,000mg per kg were toxic to adults and/or caused a number of impacts before the crabs died.
As PAHs make up around 1% of most oils, this means that the trigger values should be 1mg PAH per kg (with a maximum of 5mg per kg). And this assessment must include the PAHs that are commonly found in oil and coal.
Commercial Australian labs don’t assess all these PAHs yet, but neither did the American labs until it became necessary for assessing major oil spills such as the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska and the Deepwater Horizonspill in the Gulf of Mexico. We should not wait for the next disaster to upgrade our capability.
<h2>Cleaning up coal ports</h2>
We also need the ports to reduce their inputs. Townsville port has reduced the dust emission from its powdered zinc and lead loadings.
The train cars are covered and one at a time enter a shed which is under negative pressure. The powder is dumped in a hopper, transported to the conveyors and loaded onto the ships with no or little dust escaping the process.
The cars are then rinsed before leaving the shed. Water is retained and filtered so no dust leaves the area.
Why can’t coal be handled the same way? Improvement in loading metal powders was brought on by public objections to the previous operations.
This would eliminate coal piles in the coastal zone which blow dust all over nearby cities such as Gladstone and leach into coastal creeks. We also need the Australian sediment quality guidelines for PAHs brought up to 21st-century standard.
Do we have to wait until we have another incident like the Montara platform explosion in the Timor Sea in 2010 before we update our guidelines and response times?
Kathryn Burns is a marine scientist, James Cook University and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kathryn-burns-118459" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Pollution guidelines leave a blind spot for assessing the impact of coal and oil

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The sky is blue and you are walking through a park, speaking with a colleague, discussing a new project. You feel energised, puffing slightly as your pace speeds up with the excitement of tossing around ideas as you walk among the trees.
This is how the Nature Conservancy envisages you may spend an hour of your working week this week. April 18-24 is Work with Nature Week, a campaign to encourage Australians to engage with the natural environment. The hope is that you will come to appreciate nature – if you don’t already – and support conservation efforts.
Nature, according to the campaign, can improve your concentration and make you a sharper and more creative thinker. What boss wouldn’t want their employees to “work with nature”?
The health and ecology research literature brims with examples of the positive effects of nature on well-being. Exposure to nature helps us recover from stress and mental fatigue and restores concentration. Lower blood pressure, improved concentration and more positive emotions are identified when people go for a walk in a natural environment compared with an urban environment.
Attention Restoration Theory (ART) explains that restoration requires a different experience – such as “getting away” – in an environment that is together interesting, non-threatening and realistic. If you have spent your morning in a meeting room or office, a park with trees and perhaps a pond or fountain is about as different as you can get.
<h2>Finding nature in the heart of the city</h2>
If you work in the middle of the city, how practical is it to spend an hour of your working week surrounded by roads and concrete, pollution and the occasional rat? Even if you can go and sit among the pigeons for an hour, how “natural” is that experience of nature?
Urban ecologists have realigned thinking about nature in cities. Cities are novel environments that have the potential to support surprising amounts of nature. Parks, surrounding national parks, street trees and even private gardens create a large-scale urban forest that wildlife can use.
For example, in Sydney vulnerable Powerful Owls have been sighted in the Royal Botanic Gardens in the middle of the city. Australian cities have even been found to act as hotspots for threatened species.
Conserving any local native areas and species is important to maintain the unique natural identity of a city. In addition, manicured parks and gardens provide new kinds of plants with the potential to support both local and native species. Nature is dispersed through our cities, even if we don’t notice it.
<h2>What supports well-being in cities?</h2>
We have published research that identified the aspects of urban environments that support human well-being. Being able to move safely around a city (walkable space) and enabling space for social interaction are known factors of good urban design. Green space is another factor that, for the reasons discussed above, is important to ensure we can survive in cities.
We add biodiversity and ecosystem services to the equation as both are necessary if we are also to thrive in cities. Without sufficient biodiversity, the nature we encounter may not be realistic enough for a successful restorative experience, according to ART. Biodiversity can also keep species in check – for example, reducing the numbers of animal vectors of disease such as mosquitos and ticks.
Ecosystem services are critical to our survival. More than the air we breathe and the water we drink, when ecosystems fail, this has serious consequences for human well-being. Environmental degradation has been found to affect people who work in rural environments, but cities are already degraded landscapes. Urban nature has never been more important.
If you are considering how to spend an hour working in nature this week but your calendar is hectic and you are facing a wall of meetings, don’t despair. You could even benefit from nature just by glancing at it. In a recent Australian study, a glance at a green roof has been found to be more restorative than a glance at a concrete roof.
Working with nature is not limited to sitting in a lush garden with your laptop. A walking meeting through a landscaped area, which would provide the added benefits of exercise, or even a glance at a natural view might help you to recover from your day’s stress.
The Work with Nature campaign has another function: to remind decision-makers that we need nature in our cities. There are many forms it might take. An atrium or view from your office has the potential to help you function more effectively at work, but a large inner-city park offers us the realistic green space that provides the full benefits of nature.
Lucy Taylor is doctoral candidate in Urban Ecology, University of Sydney, and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lucy-taylor-112010" target="_blank">here</a>.
Dieter Hochuli is associate professor, School of Biological Sciences, University of Sydney and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dieter-hochuli-135191" target="_blank">here</a>.
Both are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Reducing stress at work is a walk in the park

<html><body>
The Living Future Institute of AustraliaTM (LFIA) has launched the Brickworks Living Building Challenge design competition, pressing the go button for designers, built environment professionals and students around the world to conceptualise what the world’s most sustainable retail centre ought to look like.
The Living Building Challenge™ (LBC) is the built environment’s most aspirational and rigorous performance standard. It calls for the creation of building projects at all scales that operate as cleanly, beautifully and efficiently as nature’s architecture.
“It asks us to imagine buildings that function as elegantly and efficiently as a flower: informed by its bioregion’s characteristics, that doesn’t just drain its environment of resources, gives back more than it takes. Compare this to a ‘green’ building which is often just a ‘less bad’ version of an average building,” Stephen Choi, Vice-Chair of the Living Future Institute of Australia says.
The LBC is an international sustainable building certification program, advocacy tool and philosophy. To be certified under the Challenge, projects must meet a series of ambitious performance requirements, including net positive energy, waste and water, over a minimum of 12 months of continuous occupancy.”
The Challenge is comprised of seven performance categories called ‘Petals’: Place, Water, Energy, Health &amp; Happiness, Materials, Equity and Beauty.
The Living Building Challenge has never before had a retail centre as its centrepiece, nor has an Australian project been subject to such a design competition before.
The LFIA is also opening the Challenge to local primary school students, who will have the opportunity to win solar panels for their school as an enduring legacy of the design competition. The Brickworks Living Building Challenge design competition is casting a global net to elicit truly innovative and progressive designs to unlock new possibilities for sustainability in retail, a traditionally wasteful sector in need of new ideas, according to Stephen Choi.
The Brickworks Living Building Challenge design competition, run by the Living Future Institute of Australia with Principal Partner Frasers Property Australia, aims to explore the boundaries of sustainable design within the retail environment and redefine ‘best practice’ for the sector.
For more information, click here.
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

The Living Building Challenge seeking design entrants

<html><body>
SPONSORED POST
Sustainable retail development doesn’t end when the buildings have been completed. A retail centre’s ongoing operations have as much of an effect on its sustainability as its design and construction.
Buildings account for over 40 percent of the world’s energy usage, according to the United Nations Environment Program Sustainable Buildings and Construction Initiative. Additionally, the built environment consumes about a third of our water, generates 40 percent of our waste, and is the world’s largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Green Building Council of Australia.
Vice-Chair of the Board for the Living Future Institute of Australia Stephen Choi says owners and operators of Australian commercial buildings, including retail centres, have been active in reducing their energy and water consumption as it makes business sense to do so. Forward-thinking centre operators are now looking to contribute more to their communities over the long term.
For example, Central Park in Sydney, which includes retail and residential buildings, has an on-site thermal tri-generation plant and an on-site water recycling plant. These reduce carbon emissions, minimise mains water demand and may allow excess water and electricity to be exported to nearby neighbourhoods.
One of the criteria in the Living Building Challenge performance standard is that a project must supply 105 percent of its energy needs by on-site renewable energy on a net annual basis. Projects must also provide on-site energy storage, which advances in battery technology are helping to make possible.
Frasers Property Australia’s general manager of sustainability Paolo Bevilacqua predicts battery storage will be common in commercial buildings in five years.
“The technology has developed rapidly and feasible to use it on a commercial scale,” he says.
Other ways retail centres are becoming more sustainable concentrate on their interactions with the community and inspiring consumers to act more sustainably.
“Retailers are offering visual examples to the consumer to demonstrate the fact that the energy they use is renewable, that they grow food on site, and sharing that knowledge and data to have a role beyond the centre itself,” Bevilacqua says.
Some retailers are promoting that they use local produce, including food grown on site. Frasers Property has investigated growing mushrooms in retail centre basements, for instance.
Bevilacqua expects to see urban agriculture expand from small scale gardens to commercially operated urban farms over time. There are examples of this in the US and UK, although in Australia urban farming is in its infancy.
In future, shopping centres may run workshops on how to grow food, expanding their role from being places to shop to centres for learning, Bevilacqua says.
Existing examples of retail centres operating this way include Jamie’s Ministry of Food, which runs workshops on healthy cooking in UK shopping malls, (<a href="https://www.jamieoliver.com/jamies-ministry-of-food/" target="_blank">https://www.jamieoliver.com/jamies-ministry-of-food/</a>) and demonstrations held at Westfield Stratford in the UK of Pavegen, a technology that generates energy as people walk over it (<a href="https://pavegen.com/home" target="_blank">https://pavegen.com/brands/generation-green-westfield</a><a href="https://pavegen.com/home" target="_blank">stratford</a>).
For more information, download our eBook <a href="http://propertyobserver.com.au/forward-planning/tools/ebooks-and-webinars/52152-australia-aspires-to-global-green-leadership-the-living-building-challenge" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

What are the future trends for operating sustainable retail centres?

<html><body>
SPONSORED POST
Retail centres form the backbone of many communities. More than simply places to shop, they can enrich the communities they serve as destinations for socialising, culture and education.
There’s a growing focus in retail design on “lifestyle shopping centres”, says Frasers Property Australia general manager of sustainability Paolo Bevilacqua. 
“Sustainability was about the environmental aspects. Now there’s a shift back to the people,” he says. 
“Buildings are for people so the impact of health-related initiatives such as improving air quality and access to day light, are being considered much more closely.”
Gardens and “green walls”– with vertical plantings – are increasingly being integrated into shopping centres’ designs. Facilities that encourage people to commute by bicycle, public transport and on foot are also gaining popularity.
“Now we’re starting to see urban agriculture within shopping centres as a way to connect people to nature,” Bevilacqua says. “These types of features have been shown to make people feel better in a space and stay there longer.”
The World Green Building Council found in its Health, Wellbeing &amp; Productivity in Retail report, released in February, that beyond improving customers’ experiences, retailers can boost profits by providing greener, healthier stores.
The concept of sustainable development is not new but Stephen Choi, Vice-Chair of the Board for the Living Future Institute of Australia, says there’s still room for improvement. 
“We have to do better than just continuing with more of the same; we have to try to create a built environment where every single act of design and construction made the world a better place,” Choi says.
In line with this aim, the International Living Future InstituteTM coordinates the Living Building Challenge, a design standard for sustainable buildings.
The LBC inspires the creation of buildings that have a positive impact on their environments and communities. Choi says unlike other standards, it uses nature as a benchmark rather than a bare minimum construction code. It is a philosophy and advocacy tool as well as a certification system.
It asks us to imagine a building designed and constructed to function as elegantly and efficiently as a flower: a building informed by its bioregion’s characteristics, that generates all of its own energy with renewable resources, captures and treats all of its water, is toxic free and beautiful.
To become a Living Building®, a new project must meet a stringent set of requirements, not only to be water and energy positive efficient and use sustainable materials, but also to promote health, happiness and equity, and to be beautiful places.
For more information, download our eBook <a href="http://propertyobserver.com.au/forward-planning/tools/ebooks-and-webinars/52152-australia-aspires-to-global-green-leadership-the-living-building-challenge" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

What are the future trends in sustainable design for retail centres?

<html><body>
NABERS is the industry standard for measuring the real environmental impact of Australian buildings.
For owners and tenants of buildings, NABERS provides a simple way to measure, report, improve and promote environmental performance. Over two thirds of the national office market has been rated with NABERS.
In 2016, NABERS is restructuring their training courses to facilitate modular accreditation, allowing people to train in the specific NABERS tools that match their interest and expertise.
The new <a href="https://www.nabers.gov.au/public/WebPages/ContentStandard.aspx?module=60&amp;template=3&amp;include=Assessor.htm&amp;side=AssessorTertiary.htm" target="_blank">NABERS Core Assessor Course</a>, alongside the popular Energy and Water for Offices course, are being held as face-to-face training sessions this April in Sydney and Melbourne, with further courses being planned for the second half of 2016.
The Energy and Water for Hotels, Waste for Offices, and Indoor Environment for Offices modules are being redeveloped as e-learning courses.
Whether you wish to rate your own building, take advantage of the increased demand for Assessors under the CBD scheme, or simply gain an in-depth understanding of the NABERS rating tools, the Accredited Assessor training is for you. 
NABERS Assessor Core Course and Energy and Water for Offices package
The course fee is $3,300 incl. GST, which includes the cost of a Supervised Rating (mentoring of your first rating application).
The training is delivered over one and a half days on the following dates and locations:
Sydney
5th &amp; 6th April  2016
Venue: Karstens, 111 Harrington St, Sydney
Melbourne 
12th &amp; 13th April 2016
Venue: Karstens, 123 Queen Street, Melbourne
You can enrol for either of these courses at <a href="https://learn.nabers.gov.au" target="_blank">https://learn.nabers.gov.au</a>
</body></html>

New NABERS training courses starting soon

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Individually, we use thousands of chemicals in our households and very few of us think about whether they are harming the environment. We often think about buying a “green” detergent to wash our clothes, but the simple act of shampooing and conditioning our hair, even with green products, results in more than 30 chemicals being washed into our sewers.
Despite our best efforts in the supermarket, our waste water treatment systems are well designed for removing most of these chemicals, as the majority are biodegradable. However, a number of household chemicals are difficult to remove and end up being discharged into our coastal environments and waterways.
In the past, dilution was the solution for dealing with these long-lived chemicals that don’t break down. But with rising populations and non-coastal communities, dilution is not the solution of choice.
Regulations on discharge from our waste water systems means that any chemical that is not degraded will be at very low levels but many are residual in sediments and are chronically harmful to our waterways, even at low concentrations.
This includes being toxic to benthic organisms that live in sediments and binding to hormonal receptors in fish. So which chemicals cause problems and which ones are OK?
<h2>From shower to sewer</h2>
Our everyday lives introduce a wide range of chemicals into our waste water systems. The most common are surfactants and soaps associated with simple cleaning agents and detergents.
Choosing highly biodegradable “green” detergents is a good start in any household since they easily break down in the environment, but this is only the starting point in clearing your environmental conscience.
We also need to consider pharmaceuticals and their metabolites (the breakdown product of these pharmaceuticals), disinfectants, skincare products, deodorants, fragrances, flame retardants, pesticides, insecticides and plasticisers (the chemicals we add to plastics to make them easier to mould). For some of these, there are no “green” choices and use is a medical necessity rather than a social choice.
Detailed analysis of the discharge of waste waters from around Australia, and indeed the world, shows a list of around 70 chemicals that regularly find their way into the environment (recalcitrants).
Some of these are toxic and form a group known as “chemicals of concern”. All waste water is treated before being released into the environment, but advanced treatment is now becoming common to reduce the impact of these chemicals, although this is not available to all communities.
“Source” control, or stopping input into the waste collection system, remains the best option. However, some chemicals have become so ubiquitous to our society that additional waste water treatment may be the only solution.
<h2>The problem chemicals</h2>
Some problematic chemicals of concern that find their way into our waterways are avoidable or their use can be drastically reduced.
Examples include:
<ul>
<li>
triclosan: a highly effective biocide and antimicrobial now used in a range of mouthwashes, soaps, plastics and hand cleansers. It is debatable as to whether there is a case for its use outside of clinical environments.
</li>
<li>
DEET: the active ingredient of many personal insect repellents. As with many other skin products, it is washed into the sewer via the shower.
</li>
<li>
bisphenol A: a common plasticiser that mimics the hormone estrogen. Alternatives are available.
</li>
</ul>
There is a long list of such chemicals and these are just a few examples.
<h2>Removing stubborn chemicals</h2>
Our research looks at how we can remove these chemicals from water. Wastewater treatment systems rely on the fact that molecules are either biodegradable or are removed in treatment.
If the molecule is not removed by these means, there is a propensity for environmental discharge. Typical addition treatment involves ozone treatment to destroy or fragment the molecule through oxidation and/or use of a physical barrier such as a reverse osmosis filtration membrane.
Using a combination of biodegradation, removal, oxidation and filtration is very effective and has been shown to break the pollution cycle for all but a very small number of molecules.
These molecules that still get through are highly problematic and one questions if such molecules should not be more heavily regulated. Not because they are any more toxic than others, but because they are hard to remove.
Interestingly, these are usually fragrances and biocides that we use everyday and not the detergents and pharmaceuticals you might expect. Moving to advanced water treatment as the norm, rather than the exception looks to be the only way forward if we don’t want to stop using spray disinfectants, insecticides and fragrances.
Peter Scales is professor, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation.
He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-scales-190381" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Environment

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Environment

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News