Environment

<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>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

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

<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>
As a wave of urban greenery and urban food systems starts to tumble over our cities, it is no wonder that people are increasing the instances of urban beekeeping.

Whether it be tucked away in a public reserve, down the side of a North Fitzroy garden or teetering above Lonsdale Street, urban beehives are popping up all over Melbourne, and following a national and international movement towards urban beekeeping.

The humble bee, an ally for our food systems and horticulture, is the great pollinator that we desperately need. Amidst horror headlines of <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/20/world/bees-eco-solutions/index">declining bee rates</a>, it's no wonder that our instinct is to adapt critters to our <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/city-of-melbournes-urban-forest-fund-will-open-up-to-second-phase-grants-on-aug-27th">curated urban world</a> – for our benefit and theirs.

Bees benefit from our agricultural, market gardens, and orchards, food systems both in the urban centre and outside, an encouragement of bee numbers is required to sustain these systems. With bees pollinating a least <a href="https://magazine.melbourne.vic.gov.au/rooftop-honey-harvest/">65% of the fruit and veggies</a> we eat, as Melbourne <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-18/melbournes-food-bowl-at-risk-as-housing-developments-grow/10006834">slowly grows into its own food bowl,</a> urban food systems will become important, but we can't do it without the bees.

Sure, everyone loves honey, but many people flinch if a bee buzzes past on its merry way, or shriek at the thought of swarming mass of honey bees floating through a park.

The preconception that bees will ultimately cause nuisance is the enemy of urban beekeeping, but there are standards in place to reduce the occurrence and reap the benefits.

With Australia as one of the last safe havens for the humble honey bee, the encouragement of them into urban areas is truly a no brainer. The Varroa mite is a parasite that feeds on the larvae on bees and has been devastating bee colonies all over the world. Australia can be seen as the "<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/earshot/the-last-golden-age-of-the-bee-people/11473396">last golden age of beekeeping"</a> as it has not yet reached our shores. Many people in the industry talk about 'when' rather than 'if' in regards to a Varroa invasion, a solemn group of people preparing for the inevitable introduction of this monstrous devourer of our beloved bee colonies, both rural and urban.

Therefore, the encouragement of bees in urban areas to bolster numbers and educate people about their importance is imperative in our golden age. Amongst this are the trailblazers, pushing apiary into the mainstream when a few years ago, most people were replying "Api-what?"

<a href="https://www.rooftophoney.com.au/">Melbourne City Rooftop Honey</a> are amongst the pioneers, encouraging bees back to the city and suburbs since 2010. The collective has 130 hives across Greater Melbourne and 30 in the central city, meaning there are tiny soldiers buzzing above our heads as you stroll down Lonsdale Street.

You can find hives above emporium, on top of famous Melbourne cafés and restaurants and stretched between suburbs and streets. You can sponsor hives, establish your own and purchase honey to taste the difference between a Northcote honey and Brunswick honey, a Little Bourke Street honey and a Lonsdale Street honey.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/picture_2.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Melbourne City Rooftop honey hives in action above the busy city streets. Credit: The Urban List"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="381" src="/s3/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/picture_2.png?itok=AMsNpvbY" title="Melbourne City Rooftop honey hives in action above the busy city streets. Credit: The Urban List" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Melbourne City Rooftop honey hives in action above the busy city streets. Credit: <a href="https://www.theurbanlist.com/melbourne/a-list/rooftop-honey">The Urban List</a></figcaption></figure><a href="https://www.backyardhoney.com.au/">Backyard Honey</a> is also paving the way with an urban apiary service allowing city dwellers to establish bees in their own backyard. Providing both skills and equipment to prospective urban apiarists and a support network for backyard bee information. It is a non-daunting approach to establishing bees with a whole lot of help and guidance from these guys.

<a href="https://www.instagram.com/honey_fingers/?hl=en">Honey Fingers</a> is another bee driven collective, combining urban beekeeping with art and education. Honey Fingers run talks and introduction to beekeeping courses for when it all looks a bit intimidating. This is a valuable tool for encouraging more people to consider the establishment of hives in their own urban spaces. There are many companies paving the way and bringing the bees back to the city, encouraging the everyday person to consider establishing hives in their backyards or roofs for the benefit of our mutual future.

If you want to follow in the footsteps of the many urban beekeepers in Victoria, then your bible will be <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://vgls.sdp.sirsidynix.net.au/client/search/asset/1145118">The Apiary Code of Practice</a>, prepared by the Department of Planning and Community Development.

There are standards, as with anything, to harmonize the activity with its surrounding context. The Apiary Code of Practice stipulates requirements for beekeeping within Victoria. All beekeepers keeping one hive or more must register with the Department of Primary Industries, and maintain all hives in a healthy condition.

An apiary can be used on land without a planning permit if all requirements of the Apiary Code of Practice can be met.

The common type of apiculture in urban areas is permanent occupation, popular with hobbyist beekeepers where apiaries are kept in small quantities for the extraction of honey and beeswax.

Hives must be managed appropriately, and in doing so can reduce problems associated with keeping bees.

Swarming is the natural instinct of the bee, usually occurring in spring, and is a way of reproduction when the single colony splits into two and departs for a new nest.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/picture_3.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Swarm in tree – Image Credit: Peace Bee Farm"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="461" src="/s3/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/picture_3.png?itok=uXQpvr6l" title="Swarm in tree – Image Credit: Peace Bee Farm" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Swarm in a tree. Credit: <a href="http://peacebeefarm.blogspot.com/2016/04/swarm-season">Peace Bee Farm</a></figcaption></figure>I remember walking to eat my lunch in the nearby park last spring to find it completely devoid of people. A couple of stragglers were hanging on the outskirts, milling about but I couldn't work out what was happening until I heard it, the low, deep buzz. A swarm had rested in a nearby tree and thousands were flying around the entirety of the park.

People were freaking out, but I was entranced. I sat and ate and watched as bees buzzed above my head in huge numbers. To me, it was a sight to behold – the exodus of so many bees, all collected in this tiny park wedged between a tram line and houses. It was cheering when the usual instances of bees in urban areas is a sad one nudging at your floral-printed bag or squirming in the dirt having been stepped on. Instead, there they were, present and resilient.  

Swarming is an instinct, and a feat to admire, but when the swarm attaches to your car door, or your letterbox or child's cubby house, you can see why people are fearful.

The use of artificial swarming can help to prevent swarms, by splitting up the hives yourself and reuniting them at a later time, simulating the act while removing the bee's impulse to do it.

Similarly, the expectation of the angry hordes of bees is managed by the utilisation of young queens of docile bee strains in urban areas and the use of smoke to aid in subduing bees while conducting maintenance on hives.

For the most part, bees are misunderstood and are generally not aggressive in the way that wasps can be. A considerable part of many urban beekeeping initiatives is teaching people to respect and even admire bees and understand them to take away the often misplaced fear.

As mentioned above, no planning permit is required, but all beekeepers must abide by the statutory requirements as detailed in the Apiary Code of Practice.

<ul>
<li>Hives density is enforced to reduce interactions between bees and people who live in urban areas.</li>
	<li>The 500m2 or less block are only allowed to have 1, with 500-1000 allowed to have 2 etc.</li>
	<li>Hives can be kept 3 metres from a boundary fence unless there is more than 2m, or impenetrable vegetation, and there are no windows to an adjoining boundary.</li>
</ul>
There are only a few statutory requirements for beekeeping, the rest is good management of hives, which is stipulated in the Apiary Code of Practice and is taught through beekeeping clubs, books and associations.

It is hard work, and even though nearly everyone can own a beehive, the reality is that it is a big responsibility and cannot be left unmaintained. However, as with most endeavours, good things take work. To <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/high-yield-produce-gardens-with-next-to-no-maintenance-are-set-to-enhance-apartment-living-in-australia">benefit our food systems</a> and to bolster the bee population in Australia, urban beekeeping is vital.

Urban beekeeping and <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/environmental-stewardship-deserves-commendation-as-advocates-push-eco-accreditation">education</a> are so tightly entwined in order to reduce stigma and to harmonise bees in urban areas. So consider not calling the council if your neighbour has a beehive, because if you are grateful for the apple in your hand or the lavender growing on your windowsill and you might have some urban bees nearby to thank for that.

Lead image: Peter Dyer, found of Backyard Honey tending to urban bees. Credit: <a href="https://www.domain.com.au/news/backyard-beekeeping-australias-latest-urban-craze-20150823-gj5uu7">Domain</a>
</body></html>

Plan Bee: everything you need to know about urban beekeeping

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Environment Minister Sussan Ley yesterday announced a 10-yearly review of Australia’s national environmental laws. It could not come at a more critical time, as the environment struggles under unprecedented development pressures, climate change impacts and a crippling drought.
The laws, formally known as the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/about" target="_blank">EPBC</a> Act, have been in place for 20 years.
Announcing the review, Ley <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/29/review-of-federal-environment-laws-will-cut-green-tape-and-speed-up-approvals" target="_blank">said it would “tackle green tape”</a> and reduce delays in project approvals. She said the laws must remain “fit for purpose” as our environment changes.
Serious declines in most biodiversity indicators strongly suggest the laws are not fit for purpose. Some <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/csp2.117" target="_blank">7.7 million hectares of endangered species habitat</a> has been destroyed since the Act was established and the lists of threatened and endangered species <a href="https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/biodiversity" target="_blank">continue to grow</a>.
The review should ensure Australia’s environmental law achieves what it was designed to do - protect our precious natural places.
The list below reflects the EPBC Act priorities of 70 environmental lawyers and practitioners who were polled by the National Environmental Law Association. Collectively, they have more than 500 years experience of the Act’s operation.
1. Independent decisions with clear criteria
Under the laws, proponents of activities likely to have big impacts on so-called “matters of national environmental significance” must get federal approval. The minister or a representative makes this decision and, in the overwhelming majority of cases, grants approval.
This approval power should be vested in an independent body to take the politics out of decisions. Criteria for deciding on approvals should be clearer, including thresholds for when applications must be refused on environmental grounds.
2. Take stock of cumulative impacts
A search of the EPBC Act will not find any reference to cumulative impacts, or the need to consider whether approval of one proposal is likely to lead to a raft of new projects being proposed. There is little scope to consider cumulative impacts that might happen in future — only when a new proposal constitutes the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
The Act must do better at considering both how proposed activities and future plans will interact, and the background processes of environmental change and decline.
3. Provide funds for proper enforcement
Improving the content of the Act is one thing, but monitoring, compliance and enforcement are critical. There is little point imposing tough conditions if no one is there to ensure they are met. This demands an ongoing sustainable funding base that is not dependent on political budget priorities.
4. Better data and transparency
Access to information about environmental decisions is essential for good governance. Not all documents and decisions are publicly available. It is very difficult to track down detailed aspects of approval conditions – for example, the detail of the groundwater management and monitoring plan for the Adani coal mine. This is especially important when the department’s capacity to oversee compliance is so constrained.
The Act should consider the need for public registers of all documents and data collected as part of decision-making and monitoring processes, including decisions, approvals, conditions, offset locations, compliance reports and monitoring data.
5. Expand scope of national environmental impact assessment
Commonwealth involvement in environmental approvals is limited to specific “matters of national environmental significance”. Land clearing and climate change are not included in the list of such matters, and are usually considered under state laws.
This means activities that may damage native vegetation or lead to rising emissions are only scrutinised under federal law if they might affect other things, such as threatened species or world heritage places.
Also, the Act only seeks to protect water resources when the proposed project is a large coal mine or coal seam gas venture. New triggers are needed to require federal assessment and approval for all activities that might significantly affect water, native vegetation and climate change.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299143/original/file-20191029-183116-1ihooo4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Rare black cockatoos in Victoria. The number of threatened species has grown while the EBPC Act has been operating. THREATENED SPECIES RECOVERY HUB
6. Deal with land clearing
Habitat loss is recognised as the primary driver of species decline in Australia. Rates of land clearing <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/PC/PC17001" target="_blank">have increased dramatically</a> in recent years, despite the operation of the Act.
Stronger protections are needed. These must prevent further clearing of vegetation types that are not adequately conserved in Australia’s system of protected natural areas. In cases where a proponent plans to offset damage caused by their project by restoring land elsewhere, construction should be delayed until work has begun on the restoration project and conservation benefits are occurring.
7. Make strategic assessments truly strategic
Conservation planning and environmental assessment are complex. Major new initiatives can involve interacting influences and trade-offs. The Act’s so-called <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/assessments/strategic" target="_blank">“strategic assessment” process</a> to some extent accounts for this — for example it might consider development plans across a region, rather than project-by-project.
But strategic planning must occur for a wider range of activities that may have long-term impacts on conservation: for example, the Tasmanian government’s desire to open up the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2013-08-06/mining-in-the-tarkine/4863892#history" target="_blank">Tarkine region to further mining</a>. The planning must also better consider spatial conflicts and account for future change.
This list is just the tip of the law reform iceberg, but addressing these priorities would be a good start. With only one environmental law expert and no environmental scientist on the newly announced panel, it remains to be seen how these priorities will be addressed, if at all.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126021/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
Jan McDonald, Professor of Environmental Law, University of Tasmania.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-nature-laws-are-being-overhauled-here-are-7-things-we-must-fix-126021" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Protecting the places we love: here are seven ways our nature laws must be fixed

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
A <a href="https://www.greater.sydney/performance-indicator-addressing-urban-heat" target="_blank">recent report</a> by the Greater Sydney Commission singles out urban heat as one of four priority areas given our coming climate. It identifies tree canopy as the top response for reducing city temperatures and delivering amenity. However, the public conversation about urban heat often misses the complex relationship between trees, people and the built environment, which challenges this response.
In soon-to-be-published research supported by the <a href="https://www.landcom.com.au/approach/research-and-learning/universities/" target="_blank">Landcom University Roundtable</a> we found that responding to a more extreme climate requires new social practices and new relationships with the <a href="https://www.communityeconomies.org/index.php/publications/articles/commoning-social-life" target="_blank">commons</a>. Commons are the spaces, resources and knowledge shared by a community, who are, ideally, involved in the regeneration and care of those commons. Trees are an important social commons, but they also present multiple challenges.
Closing our doors to the great outdoors
For one, trees are an outdoor amenity, but we are spending more and more time <a href="https://press.anu.edu.au/publications/journals/human-ecology-review/human-ecology-review-volume-24-number-2" target="_blank">indoors</a>. For those who can afford it, air conditioning delivers cooling in the privacy of your own home or car – no need for trees.
However, staying in cool bedrooms and car rides mean <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/lonely-unfit-and-hooked-on-air-conditioning-is-this-the-summer-of-the-future-20190208-p50whm" target="_blank">less time outdoors</a> and with others, which isn’t ideal for human health and well-being.
Air conditioning also uses more fossil-fuel-based energy, which generates more greenhouse gas emissions. The result is more climate change.
Mixed feelings about trees
As the Greater Sydney Commission <a href="https://www.greater.sydney/performance-indicator-addressing-urban-heat" target="_blank">report</a> makes clear, tree canopy in Greater Sydney is roughly proportional to household wealth. The “leafy suburbs” are the wealthier ones. This means tree planting is an important investment in less wealthy parts of the city, which experience <a href="https://www.tai.org.au/sites/default/files/Western%20Sydney%20Heatwatch%20WEB.pdf" target="_blank">more extreme heat days</a>.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/291435/original/file-20190909-175696-359nzu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/291435/original/file-20190909-175696-359nzu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Number of days over 35°C recorded in various parts of Greater Sydney (July 2018-June 2019). <a class="source" href="https://www.greater.sydney/performance-indicator-addressing-urban-heat" target="_blank">© State of NSW through the Greater Sydney Commission</a>
However, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">research</a> also shows people have mixed feelings about trees. In comparison to the neat shrubbery and easily maintained sunny plazas we’ve become used to in our cities, trees can be “messy” and “unpredictable”. Leaf litter can be slippery and natives like eucalypts, with their pendulous leaves, provide limited shade. People worry about large trees falling over or dropping branches.
Trees are often at the <a href="https://lsc.sa.gov.au/resources/TreesandtheLawBooklet.pdf" target="_blank">centre of disputes</a> between neighbours. They can also be perceived as a security problem – if trees reduce visibility they might provide cover for wrongdoers.
In addition, insurance companies can charge a premium if a property is <a href="https://www.gocompare.com/home-insurance/trees/" target="_blank">deemed at risk of damage by large trees</a>. As we experience more extreme weather, laws on vegetation clearing are <a href="https://www.thehills.nsw.gov.au/News-Publications/New-rules-to-give-property-owners-more-say-in-how-their-trees-are-managed" target="_blank">becoming more risk-averse</a>.
What trees where and when?
Urban development tends to give priority to roads and delivering the maximum number of dwellings on sites. This leaves little space for trees, which need to fit into crowded footpaths with ever-changing infrastructures. For example, will larger <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-pushes-for-5g-that-works-in-australia-20170109-gto0gz" target="_blank">trees interfere with 5G</a>?
When juggling priorities in the streetscape, trees often <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-27/100-yr-old-sydney-trees-to-be-felled-to-commemorate-anzacs/7116608" target="_blank">lose out</a>.
It’s an obvious point, but trees take time to grow. It can take many years for a planted sapling to become a shade tree. In that time there will be no shelter from the heat.
Also in that growing period, which can sometimes be unpredictable, trees need to be nurtured, especially in times of drought. And, once the tree is mature, fingers crossed that extreme weather events do not undo all those years of waiting.
So, while increasing tree canopy sounds like an obvious solution, trees are in fact a <a href="https://www.landcom.com.au/assets/Downloads/Library/f4e2252c79/Street-tree-design-guidelinesfactsheetlp.pdf" target="_blank">complex social challenge</a>. In our research, we point to ways some of these tree-related tensions can be managed.
Shade in the meantime
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/291428/original/file-20190909-175696-1wvg9yu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/291428/original/file-20190909-175696-1wvg9yu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
A structure to support fast-growing vines has been built on one of Darwin’s hottest streets, but even these will take some time to grow. <a class="source" href="https://www.facebook.com/Darwinweloveit/posts/cavenagh-st-shade-structure-complete-with-all-the-sunshine-rain-we-are-getting-t/305429293391839/" target="_blank">Darwin We Love It/Facebook</a>
Shade is an important <a href="https://placesjournal.org/article/shade-an-urban-design-mandate/" target="_blank">civic resource</a>. Large, mature trees with spreading canopy provide the best shade, so strategic construction bans and <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">tree preservation orders</a> are an obvious first step.
However, if shady canopy is decades off, we need to think about other, creative ways to provide shade in the meantime to ensure, for example, that people of diverse abilities can walk their city in reasonable comfort. This might include temporary shade structures such as awnings, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.yoursaypenrith.com.au/25909/documents/72131" target="_blank">bus shelters</a> and fast-growing vine-trellised walkways (if there is space to create troughs for soil and the structure doesn’t cause <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-15/firefighters-limited-access-darwin-cbd-shade-structure/9995608" target="_blank">access problems</a>).
And, as the <a href="https://www.cancer.org.au/preventing-cancer/reduce-your-risk/be-sunsmart" target="_blank">Cancer Council</a> consistently reminds us, we all need to adopt more climate-defensive clothing.
An important alternative is to follow our regional neighbours and start to populate parks and other public spaces at night. This suggests a need for removable shade, so we can take part in activities like <a href="https://www.landcom.com.au/news/media/new-community-lights-up-macarthur/" target="_blank">stargazing</a>.
Cultivating an intergenerational commons
Mature trees can die back or die altogether, so other trees should be maturing to take their place. Usually, experts design and maintain landscapes for others to enjoy.
However, users of the cooling services of parks could be invited into the process of planning and realising landscape designs. This would give them a say on the trees of which they have “shared custody”. Planting for succession can create an <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299720121_Commoning_as_a_postcapitalist_politics/figures?lo=1" target="_blank">intergenerational sense of ownership over a shared place</a>.
Current planning practices tend to ignore wind and solar patterns. The result is urban forms that make heat worse by prioritising comfortable private interior spaces over the commons of public space. Designing cool cities means using trees, water and buildings to create cool corridors that work with cooling breezes – or even <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-981-10-6638-2_10" target="_blank">summon</a> these in still, heat-trapping basins like Western Sydney.
These few examples point to new ways of living with trees as social commons, but they also point to new forms of commoning – collaborative forms of care and governance that invite people to <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.routledge.com/Sustainable-Practices-Social-Theory-and-Climate-Change-1st-Edition/Shove-Spurling/p/book/9780415540650" target="_blank">adopt new social practices</a> better suited to living well in the coming climate.
It is a positive step that state development agencies like <a href="https://www.landcom.com.au/organisation/about-landcom/" target="_blank">Landcom</a> aim to demonstrate global standards of liveability, resilience, inclusion, affordability and environmental quality. In so doing, they initiate transitions to these more commons-based ways of living.
<hr>
In addition to the authors of this article, the Cooling the Commons research team includes: Professor Katherine Gibson, Dr Louise Crabtree, Dr Stephen Healy and Dr Emma Power from the Institute for Culture and Society (ICS) at Western Sydney University (WSU), and Emeritus Professor Helen Armstrong from Queensland University of Technology (QUT).<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/120491/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Abby Mellick Lopes, Senior Lecturer in Design, Western Sydney University.
Cameron Tonkinwise, Professor, School of Design, University of Technology Sydney.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/keeping-the-city-cool-isnt-just-about-tree-cover-it-calls-for-a-commons-based-climate-response-120491" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Keeping the city cool isn’t just about tree cover – it calls for a commons-based climate response

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
<ul style="list-style-type: square;">
<li>I would like to know to what extent regenerative agriculture practices could play a role in reducing carbon emissions and producing food, including meat, in the future. From what I have read it seems to offer much, but I am curious about how much difference it would make if all of our farmers moved to this kind of land management practice. Or even most of them. – a question from Virginia</li>
</ul>
To identify and quantify the potential of regenerative agriculture to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we first have to define what it means. If regenerative practices maintain or improve production, and reduce wasteful losses on the farm, then the answer tends to be yes. But to what degree is it better, and can we verify this yet?
Let’s first define how regenerative farming differs from other ways of farming. For example, North Americans listening to <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2019/08/13/746576239/is-grass-fed-beef-really-better-for-the-planet-heres-the-science" target="_blank">environmentally conscious media</a> would be likely to define most of New Zealand pastoral agriculture systems as regenerative, when compared to the tilled fields of crops they see across most of their continent.
If milk and meat-producing animals are not farmed on pasture, farmers have to grow grains to feed them and transport the fodder to the animals, often over long distances. It’s hard to miss that the transport is inefficient, but easier to miss that nutrients excreted by the animals as manure or urine can’t go back to the land that fed them.
Healthy soils
Returning nutrients to the land really matters because these build up soil, and grow more plants. We can’t sequester carbon in soil without returning nutrients to the soil.
New Zealand’s style of pastoral agricultural <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://doi.org/10.1177/003231870806000107" target="_blank">does this well</a>, and we’re still improving as we focus on reducing nutrient losses to water.
Our pastoral soils tend to have <a href="https://doi.org/10.4141/S04-082" target="_blank">as much carbon</a> as they once did under forest, but concerns have been raised about <a href="http://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2013.11.012" target="_blank">carbon losses in some regions</a>. Yet, we do still have two big problems.
First, the animals that efficiently digest tough plants – including cows, sheep, and goats – all belch the greenhouse gas methane. This is a direct result of their special stomachs, and chewing their cud. Therefore, farms will continue to have high greenhouse gas emissions per unit of meat and milk they produce. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/" target="_blank">IPCC</a>) report <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49238749" target="_blank">emphasised this</a>, noting <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/08/2f.-Chapter-5_FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">that changing diets can reduce emissions</a>.
The second problem is worst in <a href="https://www.dairynz.co.nz/environment/climate-change/greenhouse-gases-in-the-dairy-industry/">dairying</a>. When a cow lifts its tail to urinate, litres of urine saturate a small area. The nitrogen content in this patch exceeds what plants and soil can retain, and the excess is lost to water as nitrate and to the air, partly as the powerful, long-lived greenhouse gas nitrous oxide.
Defining regenerative
Regenerative agriculture lacks a clear definition, but there is an opportunity for innovation around its core concept, which is a more <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.07.269" target="_blank">circular economy</a>. This means taking steps to reduce or recover losses, including those of nutrients and greenhouse gases.
Organic agriculture, which prohibits the use of antibiotics and synthetic pesticides and fertilisers, could potentially include regenerative agriculture. Organics once had the same innovative status, but now has <a href="https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2019/07/11/673094/when-less-is-better" target="_blank">a clear business model and supply chain linked to a price premium</a> achieved through certification.
The price premium and regulation linked to certification can limit the <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00886434/document" target="_blank">redesign of the organic agricultural systems</a> to incremental improvements, limiting the inclusion of regenerative concepts. It also means that emission studies of organic agriculture may not reveal the potential benefits of regenerative agriculture.
Instead, the potential for a redesign of New Zealand’s style of pastoral dairy farming around regenerative principles provides a useful example of how progress might work. Pastures could shift from ryegrass and clover to a more diverse, more deeply rooted mix of alternate species such as chicory, plantains, lupins and other grasses. This system change would have three main benefits.
Win-win-win
The first big win in farming is always enhanced production, and this is possible by better matching the ideal diet for cows. High performance ryegrass-clover pastures contain too little energy and too much protein. Diverse pastures fix this, allowing <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2018.01.009" target="_blank">potential increases in production</a>.
A second benefit will result when protein content of pasture doesn’t exceed what cows need to produce milk, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-016-1442-1" target="_blank">reducing</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2017.04.023" target="_blank">diluting</a> the nitrogen concentrated in the urine patches that are a main source of nitrous oxide emissions and impacts on water.
A third set of gains can result if the new, more diverse pastures are better at capturing and storing nutrients in soil, usually through deeper and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-015-2463-z" target="_blank">more vigorous root growth</a>. These three gains interrelate and create options for redesign of the farm system. This is best done by farmers, although <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.03.015">models</a> may help put the three pieces together into a win-win-win.
Whether you’re interested in local beef in Virginia, or the future of New Zealand’s dairy industry, the principles that define regenerative agriculture look promising for redesigning farming to reduce emissions. They may prove simpler than <a href="https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/currently-science/climate-change-new-zealand-farms-low-emission-future" target="_blank">agriculture’s wider search</a> for new ways of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, including <a href="https://www.agresearch.co.nz/news/key-step-forward-for-game-changing-grass/" target="_blank">genetically engineering ryegrass</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/123090/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Troy Baisden, Professor and Chair in Lake and Freshwater Sciences, University of Waikato.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-regenerative-farming-can-help-grow-food-with-less-impact-123090" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Climate explained: regenerative farming can help grow food with less impact

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Recycling in Australia used to be fairly simple. Our older readers may remember bottle drives, paper and cardboard collections, and the trip to the scrap metal merchant to sell metals.
This is called, in recycling parlance, sorting the “streams”. It creates very clean recycling that requires little sorting at a plant.
But recycling got more complicated. As councils organised kerbside collection, it made less economic sense to sort at the kerb. Instead, trucks collected mixed recycling and took it to centralised sorting facilities.
The materials also changed, with glass often replaced by plastics. Plastics like the PET in drink bottles and HDPE in milk bottles were easy to separate and had a ready recycling market.
Then, when developing countries like China opened the floodgates to paper and plastics, there was no need to separate the seven categories of plastics. It was cheaper and easier for Australian companies to bundle it all up and send it to China for “recycling” – in 2017, some <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-10/china-ban-on-foreign-rubbish-leaves-recycling-industry-in-a-mess/9243184" target="_blank">600,000 tonnes</a>.
When China found they were the world’s dumping ground they <a href="https://theconversation.com/heres-what-happens-to-our-plastic-recycling-when-it-goes-offshore-110356" target="_blank">shut the door</a> and demanded only clean, separated plastics – and then only the ones that had a secondary market in China.
Suddenly Australia was expected to separate more carefully – and this cost money. Now the federal government has pledged <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australias-recycling-industry-is-getting-a-20-million-boost-but-at-least-one-environmental-group-says-the-government-is-all-talk-2019-8" target="_blank">A$20 million to boost Australia’s recycling industry</a>.
But what is Australia’s recycling industry?
Right now, there are 193 material recovery facilities in Australia. Most are hand-sorted; nine are semi-automated, and nine are fully automated. These are <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-recycling-crisis-in-australia-easy-solutions-to-a-hard-problem-95231" target="_blank">nowhere near sufficient</a> to sort Australia’s annual recycling.
There are two basic ways to sort recycling: mechanical-biological treatment plants, which sort mixed waste into low-grade recycling, and material recovery facilities, which have a stronger focus on extracting reusable stuff.
Here’s how they work.
Mechanical-biological treatment
MBT plants are in various stages of development in Perth, Melbourne, and Sydney. These plants take the rubbish we generate every day and inject it into a rotary drum (a bioreactor) that spins and is heated to 60–70℃.
The process shreds the waste and the organic wastes are stabilised and homogenised. Most of the water evaporates through a fermentation process in which microorganisms break down the organic material and release heat – much like a composting system.
The material then leaves the reactor and passes over a screen that separates the organic waste. The organic waste then fermented and composted, then separated again using a smaller mesh screen. The smallest particles are sent back to the bioreactor drum to provide the microorganisms.
Meanwhile, the larger material from the first screening is sent to a wind separator where the lightweight material, like plastics, are blown the furthest, medium-weight materials, such as textiles, fall in the middle and the heaviest, like metal, glass and stone, fall immediately. The heaviest fraction is sent along a conveyor and metals are separated by a magnetic separator.
The remaining material is sent to another wind separator, along with any remaining material from the other fractions that cannot be separated, which separates combustibles and debris.
The debris (about 10% of the original waste) goes to landfill, and combustibles are sent to a facility that compresses the material into blocks for industrial fuel.
Material recovery facilities
Material recovery facilities accept mixed recycling. The first step is putting recyclables on a conveyor belt where they are carried up to a sorting line.
In the more mechanical processes, people line up along the belt and rip open bags and remove contaminants such as non-recyclable plastic, used nappies and other rubbish, which then goes to landfill.
In the more automated systems, ripping open the bags can be done by machines and the sorting is done in the next stage.
The material then goes onto a scalping screen that sorts out the small foreign objects before passing over a screen in which flat materials such as cardboard pass over and the others drop down. The paper and cardboard go off to storage. Meanwhile, the material that has dropped through hits another screen that breaks any glass, which drops through the screen and is taken by conveyor belt to a recovery bin.
The leftover material goes to fibre quality-control stations where the fibre materials (such as paper) pass by operators who pick off any contaminants before the paper goes into another bin for baling and recycling.
This leaves the cans and plastic containers. Passing this stream over a magnet means any steel cans will be removed from the stream and collected.
Next, any fibre that has made it through the process is removed manually and the plastics are then sorted manually into individual types. The bottles are perforated mechanically so they do not explode when compressed.
With the plastic containers removed, the next step is to divert the aluminium. Powerful magnetic fields created by an eddy current separator throws non-iron metals, like aluminium, forward from the belt into a product bin and non-metals fall off the belt into a separate bin. Finally most of the materials are compressed and baled for efficient transport.
Automated sorting systems
The nine more modern facilities in Australia use optical sorting systems to take out the manual and mechanical sorting. The optical sorters detect anywhere between three and eight varieties of material.
A new facility in New South Wales can detect eight different types of material: aluminium, cardboard, glass, <a href="http://www.pbpackaging.com.au/artGlossary.aspx" target="_blank">HDPE plastic</a>, mixed paper, newspaper, <a href="http://www.pbpackaging.com.au/artGlossary.aspx" target="_blank">PET plastic</a>, and steel. The combined stream passes through a light beam which then instructs a set of high pressure air jets to direct the material to one of eight collection bins.
As worldwide demand for high quality, clean recycling material increases, Australia must upgrade its technology. Incentives and financial help for recycling companies may be necessary to see Australia develop a viable domestic recycling industry.

<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121120/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">

Jeff Seadon, Senior Lecturer, Auckland University of Technology.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-recycling-is-actually-sorted-and-why-australia-is-quite-bad-at-it-121120" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

How recycling is actually sorted, and why Australia is quite bad at it

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
It was defoliants, seen above during Operation Ranch Hand in the Vietnam War, that prompted action to protect the environment during conflicts. (Source: <a class="source" href="https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Upcoming/Photos/igphoto/2000445232/">National Museum of the US Air Force</a>)<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/shireen-daft-450045"> </a>
An <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02248-6" target="_blank" title="Stop military conflicts from trashing environment">open letter</a> from 24 scientists published in Nature last month calls on governments to draft a new Geneva Convention dedicated to protecting the environment during armed conflict.
This inspired a <a href="https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/07/should-destroying-the-environment-be-a-war-crime/" target="_blank">number</a> of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/jul/24/make-environmental-damage-a-war-say-scientists-geneva-convention" target="_blank">headlines</a> that <a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/7/26/8931699/environment-war-crime-scientists-nature-geneva-convention" target="_blank">misleadingly</a> said the scientists want environmental destruction to be made a war crime.
But environmental destruction is already recognised as a war crime by the International Criminal Court. The existing legal framework governing armed conflict also provides some protections for the environment.
The problem is these protections are inadequate, inconsistent, unclear, and most military behaviour won’t fall foul of these laws.
The legal protections already in place
There are currently four <a href="https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions" target="_blank">Geneva Conventions and three Additional Protocols</a> that are supposed to regulate conduct during armed conflict, sometimes known as the rules of war.
The original four Geneva Conventions, which celebrate their <a href="https://www.redcross.org.au/stories/ihl-blog/gc70" target="_blank">70th anniversary</a> this year, contain no explicit mention of the natural environment.
The use of <a href="https://theconversation.com/agent-orange-exposed-how-u-s-chemical-warfare-in-vietnam-unleashed-a-slow-moving-disaster-84572" target="_blank">Agent Orange</a> (and Agents White and Blue) to defoliate huge spans of land during the Vietnam War led to the introduction of the first specific protections for the environment during armed conflict.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wUZA0GAMmfI?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
It’s shaky video to begin with but 18 seconds in you see US soldiers spraying Agent Orange during the Vietnam War.
Following the Vietnam War, two major developments in the law occurred.
The first was the adoption of the United Nation’s <a href="https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&amp;mtdsg_no=XXVI-1&amp;chapter=26&amp;clang=_en" target="_blank">Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques Convention</a> (ENMOD) that prohibits the hostile use of environment-altering techniques that have “widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects”.
The second was the inclusion of provisions in Additional Protocol I (API) that <a href="https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/ART/470-750044?OpenDocument" target="_blank">prohibits</a> methods or means intended or expected to cause “widespread, long term, and severe damage to the natural environment” during warfare.
Near impossibly high standards
Both treaties set a very high threshold for falling foul of the prohibitions. API requires that all three elements of damage — widespread, long term, and severe — must be met for military action to be in violation of this provision.
The consequence is that most military behaviour, even when damaging the environment, won’t be in violation of these laws.
Making it even more difficult, the meaning of the three terms differs between the two, and there is ongoing disagreement as to their definition.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287283/original/file-20190808-144851-ycqfs0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287283/original/file-20190808-144851-ycqfs0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
While an understanding was reached to determine the definitions in ENMOD, there is still dispute about the meaning of the terms in API. The definitions provided here are among the more commonly accepted. Shireen Daft, Author provided
The only environmental destruction in recent times that has been considered to meet such a high threshold was the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jan/19/iraq5" target="_blank">setting alight of Kuwaiti oil fields by Iraqi forces</a> as they withdrew during the 1991 Gulf War.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287291/original/file-20190808-144847-niiysk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287291/original/file-20190808-144847-niiysk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
A Kuwaiti oil well fire, south of Kuwait City, in March 1991. <a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kuwaiti_Oil_Well_Fire.jpg" target="_blank">Wikimedia/EdJF</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY</a>
The <a href="https://uncc.ch/category-f" target="_blank">United Nations Compensation Commission</a> held Iraq liable for the environmental damage caused in Kuwait. But because Iraq was not a party to either ENMOD or API, the Commission applied a unique legal standard derived from <a href="https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/IQ%20KW_910403_SCR687%281991%29_0.pdf" target="_blank">Security Council Resolution 687</a> and Iraq is still paying compensation to Kuwait to this day.
Neither ENMOD nor API specifies that a breach of these provisions constitutes a war crime. This came in 2002 when the <a href="http://legal.un.org/icc/statute/99_corr/cstatute.htm" target="_blank">Rome Statute</a> establishing the <a href="https://www.icc-cpi.int/" target="_blank">International Criminal Court</a> came into force.
The Rome Statute says it is a war crime to intentionally cause “widespread, long-term, and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive” to the military advantage to be obtained.
The terms are not defined in the Rome Statute, and what is meant by “clearly excessive” is subjective, and introduces a test of proportionality.
Another Geneva Convention?
A new international agreement that balances the interests of environmental protection and respects the laws on armed conflict could be of enormous benefit.
The existing legal framework is only equipped to deal with direct attacks on the natural environment.
But this ignores the many other ways the environment is affected by conflict. Resources such as <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/05/world/africa/conflict-diamonds-explainer/index" target="_blank">diamonds</a>, <a href="https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-conflict-mineral-coltan-mining-in-dr-congo-and-australia/" target="_blank">coltan</a>, <a href="https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/forests/bloodtimber/" target="_blank">timber</a> and <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22229692-700-ivory-poaching-funds-most-war-and-terrorism-in-africa/" target="_blank">ivory</a> are all used to help fund conflicts, and this can place enormous stress on the environment.
A particular gap is that no consideration is given in the existing framework to non-human species - to wildlife affected by war or to <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/03/europe/beluga-whale-norway-scli-intl/index" target="_blank">animals used for military purposes</a>. Yet conflict has proved the <a href="https://www.icrc.org/en/document/natural-environment-neglected-victim-armed-conflict" target="_blank">biggest predictor</a> of population declines in wild species.
But a new treaty that creates strong, effective, and enforceable protections requires significant political will.
An <a href="https://www.toxicremnantsofwar.info/whatever-happened-to-the-5th-geneva-convention/" target="_blank">attempt</a> was made two decades ago, headed by Greenpeace, but no agreement could be reached. That attempt was made during a time when international cooperation and treaty development was at its highest, following the end of the Cold War.
In the current political and social environment it seems unlikely any attempt for such an agreement would be successful. At best, we would see watered-down protections, no stronger than what is already in place. Thus drafting such a Convention now could do more harm than good, in the long run.
If not a new treaty, then what?
The International Law Commission (ILC) is <a href="http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/8_7.shtml" target="_blank">about to release its report</a> dealing with the issue of protecting the environment during armed conflict. This was what inspired the Open Letter from the scientists in the first place.
The <a href="http://legal.un.org/docs/index.asp?symbol=A/CN.4/L.937" target="_blank">Draft Principles</a> it is producing are not new principles of law, but those already found in the existing legal framework. Unfortunately the work produced so far continues to use “widespread, long term, and severe” with no clarity as to what they mean.
But they do confirm that all the fundamental principles of the rules of war apply to the environment, and should be interpreted “with a view to its protection”. The environment should not be a target, and the impact on the environment must be taken into consideration in military operations.
The work of the ILC should inform governments of the interpretation of existing law. Governments should then give more attention to the environment in the operational guidelines used by their militaries.
The Australian <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://trove.nla.gov.au/version/39374943" target="_blank">Law of Armed Conflict</a> manual, used by our defence forces, already acknowledges they have a duty to protect the natural environment. The next step is to move beyond this general principle to the specific, and have clear guidelines about what protecting the environment during armed conflict means, in practice.
The International Committee of the Red Cross is also currently updating its <a href="https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/article/other/57jn38.htm" target="_blank">guidelines</a> for all military manuals to ensure the environment is a consideration to be evaluated during all military operations.
While the world might not yet be ready to consider a new Geneva Convention relating to the environment, the survival of our natural environment does depend on changes being made to the way the war is conducted.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121180/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Shireen Daft, Lecturer, Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/environmental-destruction-is-a-war-crime-but-its-almost-impossible-to-fall-foul-of-the-laws-121180" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Environmental destruction is a war crime, but it’s almost impossible to fall foul of the laws: Shireen Daft

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Coalition minister Angus Taylor is under scrutiny for possibly intervening in the clearing of grasslands in the southern highlands of New South Wales. Leaving aside the political dimensions, it’s worth asking: why do these grasslands matter?
The grasslands in much of eastern Australia are the result of forests and woodlands cleared to “improve” the landscape (from a grazier’s point of view) to make it suitable for grazing livestock.
The “improvement” typically entails cutting trees, burning the felled timber and uprooting tree stumps, followed by ploughing, fertilising and sowing introduced grasses that are more palatable to livestock than many native grasses.
However, largely treeless native grasslands once occurred at high elevations across much of the Monaro tableland, in the area stretching between Canberra and Bombala.
The Monaro grasslands (or in scientific speak, the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/conservation-advices/natural-temperate-grassland-southern-tablelands" target="_blank">natural temperate grassland of the Southern Tablelands</a>) are in relatively dry and cold areas, particularly in upland valleys or frost hollows where cold air descends at night.
The combination of dry climate and cold restricts tree growth and instead has encouraged grasses and herbs. Native grasses such as kangaroo grass and poa tussock dominate the grasslands, but there are many other unique plants. A typical undisturbed grassland area will support 10-20 species of native grasses and 40 or more non-grass species.
The grassy plains are also home to unique cold-adapted reptiles such as the grass-land earless dragon, little whip snake, pink-tailed worm lizard and striped legless lizards. This combination of plants and animals create a unique ecological community.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286192/original/file-20190730-43136-1v4usvm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286192/original/file-20190730-43136-1v4usvm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Striped legless lizards may resemble a snake, but most of its body is actually tail. It has vestigial limbs and a non-forked tongue. Benjamint444/Wikipedia, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-NC-SA</a>
A fraction remain
It is estimated <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1442-8903.2007.00363" target="_blank">only 0.5%</a> of the area that would once have been natural temperate grasslands in the Southern Tablelands remains. The rest has been gradually “improved” <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/11035501?selectedversion=NBD25432907" target="_blank">since the mid-nineteenth century</a> to make them more productive for livestock grazing.
Livestock dramatically change the composition of grasslands, as animals remove palatable plants and compact the soil under their weight. Disturbed soil and the livestock also help to <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/11035501?selectedversion=NBD25432907">spread non-native weeds</a>.
However, most native grasslands have not just been modified by grazing but completely replaced by man-made pastures. That is, the land has been ploughed, fertilised and the seeds of introduced grasses have been planted.
These changes to the landscape mean much of the landscape is dominated by introduced plants and is now unsuitable for many of the native plants and animals that once lived and grew there.
Because the Natural Temperate Grassland of the Southern Tablelands is now so rare it is <a href="https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/profile.aspx?id=20260" target="_blank">classified as critically endangered and federally protected</a>. Furthermore, many of the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/conservation-advices/natural-temperate-grassland-southern-tablelands" target="_blank">distinct plants and animals</a> that still live in these grasslands are classified as vulnerable or endangered.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286193/original/file-20190730-186833-i4fw9q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286193/original/file-20190730-186833-i4fw9q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
The pink-tailed worm lizard is one of the rare species living in the native grasslands of the Southern Tablelands. <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pink-tailed_Worm-lizard_(Aprasia_parapulchella)_(9106371285).jpg" target="_blank">Matt Clancy/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-SA</a>
Some of the best remaining examples of the Monaro grasslands can be found in old cemeteries and in areas set aside as public livestock grazing areas. These areas of public land have often been spared from pasture improvement or only lightly grazed, and thus now support relatively intact native grassland ecosystems.
While, to the untrained eye the Monaro grasslands may seem unremarkable and difficult to distinguish from grazing pastures, they are deeply important. They show us what Australia once looked like, and act as a haven for native biodiversity.
Indeed, what remains of the natural grasslands is now so disturbed by agriculture there is a real threat this distinctive ecological community and many of the species it contains may disappear altogether, if they are not protected from excessive grazing, fertilisers and the plough.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121181/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
Mike Letnic, Professor, Centre for Ecosystem Science, UNSW
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-are-native-grasslands-and-why-do-they-matter-121181" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

What are native grasslands, and why do they matter?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
As the dramatic shutdown of major recycling company SKM this week has illustrated, recycling is not free.
Householders in Australia pay council rates for a recycling and garbage service. This fee is largely based on the costs of collecting, sorting and processing, and – importantly – what returns are likely from selling the end product.
However, since 2017 the price on the open market for mixed plastics has <a href="https://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/Business/Investment-facilitation/Recovered-resources-market-bulletin" target="_blank">plummeted</a> from about A$325 per tonne to A$100 per tonne. Mixed glass actually dropped to a negative value, which meant that generators were potentially paying for it to be taken away.
On the other hand, prices for high-quality recycling (not mixed materials or items contaminated with food, for example) largely remained the same or <a href="https://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/Business/Investment-facilitation/Recovered-resources-market-bulletin" target="_blank">slightly increased</a>.
This shows the market for low-quality, poorly sorted recycling, which Australia has <a href="https://theconversation.com/heres-what-happens-to-our-plastic-recycling-when-it-goes-offshore-110356" target="_blank">previously</a> offloaded to China and other Southeast Asian countries, is ending.
Unless we improve our recycling industry, we must start sending more recyclable material to landfill – as is <a href="https://www.standard.net.au/story/6301694/recycling-in-landfill-following-processor-shutdown-council-confirms/" target="_blank">happening now in some Victoria councils</a>.
So what can we do about it?
Reduce first
Reduction, fundamentally, comes before recycling. We <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-recycle-our-way-to-zero-waste-78598" target="_blank">need to avoid waste to begin with</a>, in our homes and businesses.
As consumers, we should be vocal about seemingly contradictory practices by businesses. For example, supermarkets congratulate themselves on reducing plastic bags, but then use small plastic toys as marketing tools – not even making them out of recycled plastic. These toys are destined for disposal, potentially contaminating recycling streams, and <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/coles-and-woolworths-in-plastic-toy-promo-wars" target="_blank">not all consumers are happy</a>.
Throw out recycling properly
It’s tempting, if you don’t know whether something is recyclable, to simply put it in the yellow bin and assume someone on the other end will “sort it out”. But in reality, incorrectly recycled material can contaminate entire loads of otherwise valuable and useful recyclables, diverting it to landfill.
Councils blame the recyclers for this, who blame the councils. Everyone blames state governments, and they in turn blame the recyclers.
Fundamentally though, we as the generators of waste must assume a high degree of responsibility. We are the ones putting contaminants into the recycling system that everyone else in the management structure must deal with.
It’s our job to familiarise ourselves with what can and cannot be recycled – although, to be fair, this can vary widely from council to council, and should be made easier to check.
If we can clean up the recycling streams, markets should increase and prices for these commodities will similarly rise. This encourages those in the sector to <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-recycling-plants-have-no-incentive-to-improve-81336" target="_blank">improve their plant technology</a>, and for others to enter in what would then be a more competitive market.
Develop the industry
Clean recycling still requires an established market to be profitable. Governments, as the single largest purchasers in Australia, can play an important role here.
The Victorian government has already <a href="https://www.governmentnews.com.au/victorian-government-moves-on-green-procurement/" target="_blank">committed</a> to helping government agencies increase recycled content in their purchasing requirements. Other governments are doing <a href="https://www.governmentnews.com.au/governments-should-buy-recycled-material-inquiry/" target="_blank">likewise</a> and this is a very positive step.
At a minimum, contracts and tenders should specify a certain level of recycled materials used in products sold to the government, or prefer those suppliers who do have recycled content.
One innovative approach where governments can use their purchasing power is with the use of plastic and glass recyclables in roads. Trials have been extremely positive.
In fact, the Australian Council of Recycling has <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/yourlanguage/italian/en/article/2019/05/09/call-government-use-recycled-content-build-infrastructure" target="_blank">suggested</a> that using recycled material in construction for the Snowy 2.0 scheme would consume all the recyclables generated in Australia.
We need to chew and walk gum
The most important message is, just as there’s no single person or sector to blame for Australia’s dismal recycling situation, there’s no single solution. We all need to take more care with what we put in the bin. Governments around Australia should incentivise local manufacturers to use domestic recycling.
Recycling companies should certainly improve their technology so they can produce higher-quality material, which can be sold at a profit.
And, as the current SKM debacle illustrates, governments need a plan B when the market breaks down.
Even with all of this, a sustainable domestic recycling industry is some way off. We urgently need to start doing the things we already know will work, rather than playing endless rounds of a pointless blame game.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121241/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
Trevor Thornton, Lecturer, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-just-blame-government-and-business-for-the-recycling-crisis-it-begins-with-us-121241" target="_blank">original article</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