Great Barrier Reef

<html><body>
An approved beachfront tourist accommodation park at 66-72 Rules Beach Road, on the edge of The Great Barrier Reef has hit the market.
The asset offers a 5.05 hectares of land area that is the balance area of ‘Rules Beach Estate’ and is being offered by way of expressions of interest closing June 25 2020.
The site is being marketed and sold by Ray White Special Projects Qld Executive Directors Mark Creevey and Tony Williams, in conjunction with HTL Property Directors Glenn Price and Brent McCarthy.
<img src="https://f.datasrvr.com/f1/120/40079/Rules_1.JPG" width="640" data-imagetype="External">
Mr Creevey said, "we know travel overseas will be heavily restricted in the short-to-medium term, and maybe even longer, so people’s focus will turn to domestic destinations."
“We expect a huge amount of money to be invested in tourism at home, and this asset really does represent exactly the kind of resort Australians will look to visit in the near future."
Mr Williams said the thoughtful and architecturally designed scheme was led by Shane Thompson, a prominent Australian architect, and Principal of Shane Thompson Architects.
“The site has development approval in place for glamping, camping and caravan park, as well as 42 freehold holiday villas and a rural service centre,” he said.
“It’s encircled by unspoiled beaches, Deepwater National Park and Baffle Creek inlet, with access to Lady Elliot and Lady Musgrave islands.
“Substantial development and infrastructure works to the estate have already been undertaken with access, power and water connected, and DA for sewerage treatment plant," Mr Williams added.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Approved beachfront tourist accommodation park near Great Barrier Reef listed

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Deloitte Access Economics <a href="https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/economics/articles/great-barrier-reef" target="_blank">has valued</a> the Great Barrier Reef at A$56 billion, with an economic contribution of A$6.4 billion per year. Yet this figure grossly underestimates the value of the reef, as it mainly focuses on tourism and the reef’s role as an Australian icon.
When you include aspects of the reef that the report excludes, such as the ecosystem services provided by coral reefs, you find that the reef is priceless.
Putting a price on the Great Barrier Reef buys into the notion that a cost-benefit analysis is the right way to make decisions on policies and projects that may affect the reef. For example, the environmental cost of the extension to the <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-22/massive-abbot-point-coal-port-expansion-gets-federal-approval/7047380" target="_blank">Abbot Point coal terminal</a> can be compared to any economic benefits.
But as the reef is both priceless and irreplaceable, this is the wrong approach. Instead, the <a href="http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001395/139578e.pdf" target="_blank">precautionary principle</a> should be used to make decisions regarding the reef. Policies and projects that may damage the reef cannot go ahead.
How do you value the Great Barrier Reef?
The Deloitte report uses what’s known as a “contingent valuation” approach. This is a survey-based methodology, and is commonly used to measure the value of non-market environmental assets such as <a href="http://www.appstate.edu/%7Ewhiteheadjc/eco3620/projects/mocktrial/pdf/loomisandwhite-ee-1996.pdf" target="_blank">endangered species</a> and <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2663496.pdf" target="_blank">national parks</a> – as well as to calculate the impact of events such as <a href="http://econweb.ucsd.edu/%7Ercarson/papers/AlaskaReport.pdf" target="_blank">oil spills</a>.
In valuing the reef, surveys were used to elicit people’s willingness to pay for it, such as through a tax or levy. This was found to be A$67.60 per person per year. The report also uses the travel-cost method, which estimates willingness to pay for the Great Barrier Reef, based on the time and money that people spend to visit it. Again, this is commonly used in environmental economics to value national parks and the recreational value of local lakes.
Of course, all methods of valuing environmental assets have limitations. For example, it is difficult to make sure that respondents are stating realistic amounts in their willingness to pay. Respondents may act strategically if they think they really will be slugged with a Great Barrier Reef levy. They may conflate this environmental issue with all environmental issues.
But more importantly, the methodology in the report leaves out the most important non-market value that the reef provides, which are called <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/publications/ecosystem-services-key-concepts-and-applications" target="_blank">ecosystem services</a>. For example, coral reefs provide storm protection and erosion protection, and they are the nurseries for 25% of all marine animals which themselves have commercial and existence value.
The Deloitte report even cites (but does not reference) a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378014000685" target="_blank">2014 study</a> that values the ecosystem services provided by coral reefs at US$352,249 per hectare per year. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park <a href="https://www.npsr.qld.gov.au/world-heritage-areas/great_barrier_reef" target="_blank">covers 35 million hectares</a> with 2,900 individual reefs of varying sizes. This means the ecosystem services it provides are worth trillions of dollars per year.
That is, it is essentially priceless.
The problem with putting a value on the Reef
Valuing the environment at all is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2014/jul/24/price-nature-neoliberal-capital-road-ruin" target="_blank">contentious</a> in <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069684710084" target="_blank">economics</a>. Valuation is performed so that all impacts from, say, a new development, can be expressed in a common metric – in this case dollars. This allows a cost-benefit analysis to be performed.
But putting a price on the Great Barrier Reef hides the fact that it is irreplaceable, and as such its value is not <a href="http://le.uwpress.org/content/82/2/141.short" target="_blank">commensurate</a> with the values of other assets. For instance, using Deloitte’s figure, The Australian newspaper <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/great-barrier-reef-valued-at-more-than-12-opera-houses-study/news-story/33e7f7420e2b41bf9efd6a4aa6e3351b">compared the reef</a> to the value of 12 Sydney Opera Houses. But while they are both icons, the Opera House can be rebuilt. The Great Barrier Reef cannot. Any loss is irreversible.
When environmental assets are irreplaceable and their loss irreversible, a more appropriate decision-making framework is the <a href="http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001395/139578e.pdf" target="_blank">Precautionary Principle</a>.
The Precautionary Principle suggests that when there is uncertainty regarding the impacts of a new development on an environmental asset, decision makers should be cautious and minimise the maximum loss. For example, if it is even remotely possible that the extension to the Abbot Point coal terminal could lead to <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-22/massive-abbot-point-coal-port-expansion-gets-federal-approval/7047380" target="_blank">massive destruction</a> of the reef, then precaution suggests that it shouldn’t go ahead.
Assigning a value to the reef might still be appropriate under the Precautionary Principle, to estimate the maximum loss. But it would require the pricing of all values and especially ecosystem services.
While the Precautionary Principle has been <a href="http://www.public.iastate.edu/%7Ejwcwolf/Papers/Gardiner%20on%20Precautionary%20Principle.pdf" target="_blank">much maligned</a> due to its perceived bias against development, it is a key element of the definition of Ecologically Sustainable Development in Australia’s <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2012C00801" target="_blank">Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999</a>.
For a priceless asset like the Great Barrier Reef, it is perhaps better to leave it as “priceless” and to act accordingly. After all, if the Precautionary Principle is ever going to be used when assessing Ecologically Sustainable Development, in contrast with cost-benefit analysis and valuations, it is surely for our main environmental icon.
Ultimately, the protection and prioritisation of the Great Barrier Reef is a political issue that requires political will, and not one that can be solved by pricing and economics.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80061/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;">
Neil Perry, Research Lecturer, Western Sydney 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/whats-the-economic-value-of-the-great-barrier-reef-its-priceless-80061" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

What's the economic value of the Great Barrier Reef? It's priceless

<html><body>
Terry Agnew has offloaded Great Keppel Island resort to an Asian duo, after a recent agreement with a cryptocurrency consortium for the island did not proceed..
The buyer, identified as Wei Chao Pty Ltd Singapore, lists its directors as Wan Long Wei and Pauline Wei from Taiwan as well as Peter Godber from Brisbane.
<div>The sale involves a significant portion of 970 ha of development approved land on the island, subject to State and Federal Government requirements.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Current development approvals for the island include a 250-room beachfront hotel, 300 luxury apartments, 285 luxury villas, 9,000sq m of retail shops and a 250-berth marina.</div>
<div>
Knight Frank Rockhampton agent Pat O’Driscoll was marketing Great Keppel Island with JLL Hotels with over 100 requests for information memorandums.
While an agreement has been reached, the sale process is yet to be finalised.
Great Keppel is the largest in the Keppel group of Islands with a total area of some 1454 ha and boasts 17 white sandy beaches and crystal clear waters just 12 kilometres off Yeppoon on the Capricorn Coast at the southern end of the Great Barrier Reef. 
The sale of Great Keppel Island is the fifth Great Barrier Reef island sale over the past two years, which includes South Molle Island, Daydream Island, Wilson Island and Heron Island.
 
</div>
</body></html>

Terry Agnew offloads Great Keppel Island resort to Asian duo

<html><body>
A cryptocurrency consortium plans to resurrect luxury resort plans for Great Keppel Island.
Great Keppel will become the world’s largest island cryptocurrency micro-economy, a project that could bring the new digital economy to the bricks-and-mortar mainstream.
Investors will be invited to buy so-called Great Keppel Island Tokens in order to fund the $300 million development through what is known as a Security Token Offering, similar to an initial public offering for shares.
The tokens will be tradeable on existing cryptocurrency exchanges.
Under the deal, the owner of the existing defunct resort at Great Keppel Island, Tower Holdings, will retain 12% of the GKI Tokens.
Tower Holdings, which owns more than 70% of Great Keppel Island, is owned by Sydney businessman Terry Agnew.
The GKI Tokens will be backed by the value of the development.
Building is expected to start next year and be completed within five years.
<p data-gtm-vis-polling-id-6236702_632="810" data-gtm-vis-recent-on-screen-6236702_632="1536019780230" data-gtm-vis-first-on-screen-6236702_632="1536019780230" data-gtm-vis-total-visible-time-6236702_632="2900">The STO is being marketed with a flashy sales video starring Greg Norman, who is designing the development’s golf course.
"The development is fully supported from all levels of Australian government, federal, state and local, and has approval for the immediate development of an 18-hole international golf course," says the video.
"Also approved are 750 luxury villas … 300 luxury apartments and a five-star beachfront resort with 250 rooms and a 250-berth marina."
Tower Holdings’ chief executive officer, Anthony Aiossa, told Fairfax Media even with all the approvals in place, Tower had difficulty raising the funds to develop the site until it was approached by someone proposing the cryptocurrency consortium earlier this year.
He said the company had to do homework into cryptocurrencies before it seriously considered the deal.
It is expected that a white paper, similar to a prospectus, will be released on Friday or Monday, with the minimum likely to be more than $100,000, while those buying in during the retail round might have to meet a minimum of around $1000. 
"I think to get a lot of people involved is a wonderful idea," the unofficial mayor Jeff Mercer told Ross Greenwood's 2GB Money News.
The island is a small active township with 18 private homes, he said, adding that the island wasn't closed.
</body></html>

Cryptocurrency play behind Great Keppel Island's $300 million development proposal

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The Great Barrier Reef has experienced extensive coral bleaching over the past two years. Faced with this reality, scientists are proposing a range of options to save the reef.
A recent conference showcased new possibilities for enhancing Reef resilience, including boosting coral abundance and geoengineering techniques that would manipulate local conditions to reduce ocean temperatures.
These geoengineering approaches carry their own risks, and require careful management, even at the research and field testing stages.
Technology is needed to buy the reef time
Climate change is affecting the reef through bleaching events, species redistribution, and ocean acidification. Stabilising environmental conditions “to protect current reef biodiversity” requires that global temperatures stay below 1.2℃. Yet modelling of the global community’s current commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement suggests that global warming between 2.6-3.2℃ will occur by 2100. This would destroy the Great Barrier Reef as we know it.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229736/original/file-20180730-106514-c759g6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Artificial marine clouds already occur as a result of shipping exhaust. Scientists propose simulating this to cool the Reef. Liam Gumley, Space Science and Engineering Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison
It is not surprising, then, that scientists are looking to buy the reef some time, while the international community works to stabilise and then reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. The Commonwealth and Queensland governments have announced funding for feasibility projects aimed at manipulating surface water temperatures using three different techniques:
<ul>
<li>
Creating a reflective surface film that would float on the surface of the water. Made from calcium carbonate (the same mineral as coral), the film would reflect sunlight, thereby lowering water temperatures and ultraviolet radiation exposure.
</li>
<li>
Marine cloud brightening to also reflect more sunlight away from the reef. The plan is to spray microscopic salt particles into clouds using customised vessels or modified snow machines. This increases the concentration of droplets in clouds and encourages smaller, more reflective droplets to form.
</li>
<li>
Water-mixing units with large, slow moving fans that will draw cool water from 10-30 metres deep and deliver it to surface areas to limit coral heat stress. In 2017 this proposal received A$2.2 million in Commonwealth funding, to test eight water-mixing units over a 1 kilometre square area of Moore Reef, off the coast of Cairns.
</li>
</ul>
Engineering the climate of Australia’s most iconic natural system carries obvious risks. Indeed, Australia has a history of well-intended attempts to manage nature that have backfired because the risks were not fully understood.
We must be confident that such technological interventions will protect the reef, not contribute to its destruction. This is a problem because scientific trials are supposed to identify and assess risks, so we won’t fully understand what impacts they have until such trials are undertaken.
Governance necessary for public confidence
Building public confidence that potential risks have been identified and addressed is essential to the long-term success of reef geoengineering proposals. Even feasibility studies can be derailed if they lack public support.
The legitimacy and ultimate acceptability of reef geoengineering technologies therefore demands robust and transparent processes for funding, research, field testing and eventual deployment. Drawing on the Oxford Principles for Geoengineering Governance, the minimum governance standards should include:
<ul>
<li>criteria and clear processes for research funding decisions</li>
<li>public access to information about planned field testing</li>
<li>demonstrated compliance with Australia’s environmental laws.</li>
</ul>
Current environmental laws do not make special exemptions for scientific research or testing in areas of national environmental significance, such as the Great Barrier Reef. Any geoengineering trial that might have a “significant impact” on those areas is illegal without a permit from the Commonwealth Environment Minister. The Minister is guided by the precautionary principle and World Heritage obligations in issuing such permits.
The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act imposes separate approval requirements and makes protection of the reef the highest priority. This would suggest that the standard for environmental assessment for any proposal to run geoengineering trials on the Reef should be high.
It is unclear how the federal environment minister and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority will evaluate whether the risks of field testing are small enough to justify granting their approval. The position is made more uncertain by the fact that the authority is directly involved in at least one of the projects. This uncertainty risks poor environmental outcomes and erosion of public confidence.
We need a strong framework for assessing and managing the risks of geoengineering, to address legitimate public concerns.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100674/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">As the stewards of the reef, the Marine Park Authority is ideally placed to take the lead on developing this framework, to ensure we have the best possible chance of saving our most important natural wonder.
Kerryn Brent, Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania
Brendan Gogarty, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Tasmania
Jan McDonald, Professor of Environmental Law, University of Tasmania
Jeff McGee, Senior Lecturer in Climate Change, Marine and Antarctic Law Faculty of Law and Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/geoengineering-the-great-barrier-reef-needs-strong-rules-100674" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Main photo: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/oregonstateuniversity/24577819729/" target="_blank">Oregon State University/Flickr</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-SA</a>
</body></html>

Geoengineering the Great Barrier Reef needs strong rules

<html><body>
Bedarra Island, on the Great Barrier Reef, has a handful of private beach homes.
They line the east side of the island.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://raywhitemissionbeach.com.au/properties/residential-for-sale/qld/bedarra-island-4852/house/1681605" target="_blank">Ray White Port Douglas agent Mark Flinn</a> is marketing Berrara Island Villa, a home with private beach that has $2 million plus hopes.
Set on 8000 sqm at Doorila Bay, the home has three pavilions - one once home to the famous artist Noel Woods which has gin and cognac bottles set into a decorative wall which he created.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/2/21/bed1.jpg" alt="">
The property has been owned for two decades by Terry Kaljo, the boss of Contemporary Hotels, a pioneer in Australia's luxury accomodation industry.
“Its latest renovation, if I may boast, is spectacular," Kaljo said.
It was designed by top Australian architect Robert Davidov of Davidov Partners.
“The property is one of the most special in the Contemporary Hotels portfolio, seeing is believing.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/2/21/bed2.jpg" alt="">
“We’ve had lots of wonderful family holidays there over the years, but my children are adults now with busy lives and careers and we are not using the home as we use to anymore. So time to let it go."
Ms Kaljo, who travels extensively, says there was nothing better than to find paradise here in the safety of Australia.
“We would love to represent the home under our ‘Contemporary Hotels’ umbrella for the new purchases if they would like us to - it truly is a unique and special place.” Ms Kaljo said.
This is the only house that is on the beachfront on this east side of the island. 
Bedarra private resort is on the southern side of the bay right across the other side of the bay but they are not allowed to land on the private beach out the front of the house so it is your own sand and beach.
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

Bedarra Island hideaway listed through Ray White

<html><body>
Keswick Island, a Great Barrier Reef island, is on the market with $30 million hopes.
Keswick Developments, owned by the Dawson-Damer, is hopeful of attracting Chinese tourism interests. 
Captain Cook charted Keswick on his maiden voyage, but since the hilly island -- home to an extinct volcano -- has been sparsely occupier with only about 20 houses and permanent residents.
Cars are banned, with residents travelling by golf buggy on the island.
Keswick Developments obtained the head lease eight years ago after the previous owner, Peter Marshall, spent 20 years attempting to develop the island.
The new owner will have a 117-hectare development lease with the Queensland government until 2096.
The rest of the 517 hectare island is national park. 
The purchase will also give the buyer a 25-hectare seabed lease for a 180-berth marina and deep water jetty.
The mixed-use zoning on the sub-tropical island can accommodate 1000 dwellings and 3000 people. 
The island, 32 kilometres off the coast of Mackay, already has a sealed airstrip, 150 subdivided lots, and preliminary key infrastructure for ongoing development.
</body></html>

Great Barrier Reef

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Great Barrier Reef

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News