Greenhouse

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
With time <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-has-two-decades-to-avoid-the-most-damaging-impacts-of-climate-change-104409" target="_blank">running out</a> for us to make deep reductions in greenhouse emissions, you may well be wondering what you personally can do to minimise your own greenhouse footprint.
The average greenhouse emissions per Australian are the equivalent of <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">21 tonnes</a> of carbon dioxide per year. How can you offset or neutralise your personal share of these carbon emissions in the most cost-effective way?
There are some places where the government is willing to take the necessary action on your behalf. The ACT government, for example, is on track to <a href="https://www.environment.act.gov.au/cc" target="_blank">eliminate</a> greenhouse gas emissions generated within Canberra by 2045, and indeed by 2020 will make its own electricity sector <a href="https://www.environment.act.gov.au/cc" target="_blank">carbon-neutral</a>.
The latter feat was achieved by contracting several new zero-emission solar and wind farms to produce renewable electricity equivalent to Canberra’s consumption. Canberra retail electricity prices continue to be among the <a href="https://www.datocms-assets.com/6959/1545274459-2018-residential-electricity-price-trends-final-report.PDF" target="_blank">lowest</a> in Australia.
Take advantage of solar and wind
If you don’t live in Canberra, you need another way to neutralise your emissions. Fortunately, the cost of solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind power have both fallen rapidly. Australia has long been in the midst of a boom in rooftop PV, and many Gigawatts of ground-mounted PV and wind farms are being <a href="http://theconversation.com/at-its-current-rate-australia-is-on-track-for-%2050-renewable-electricity-in-2025-102903" target="_blank">built</a> around the country. This has put Australia on track to reach 50% renewable electricity in 2024. Each Megawatt hour (MWh) of electricity <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">generated</a> by renewables reduces electricity from coal by a similar amount, and therefore avoids about 0.9 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions.
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7Gd1z/2/" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="100%" height="450"></iframe>
The above pie chart, based on <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">federal government data</a>, shows the various sources of Australian greenhouse emissions in 2017. Electricity production is the largest source and can be neutralised by substituting PV and wind for coal and gas. Emissions from electricity use in commerce and industry, the land sector, industrial processes and high temperature heat is largely beyond your control, however, so it’s perhaps best to focus your attention closer to home.
Cost-effective action
However, putting solar panels on your roof, switching to an electric car, and substituting electric heat pumps for gas water and space heating can (or soon will) be cost-effective steps that you can take to reduce your greenhouse footprint. And in the long term, these will either pay for themselves or even end up saving you money.
A 10-kilowatt solar PV system installed on your roof will produce <a href="http://apvi.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CMC_CanberraSolarPotential_Final_lowres.pdf" target="_blank">about 14 MWh</a> of electricity per year. Since coal power stations produce 0.9 tonnes of carbon dioxide per MWh this save about 12 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year.
To offset your 21 tonnes of CO2 per year, you would therefore need to install 15kW of solar PV capacity for each person who lives in your house. So if four people live in your house, you would need a 60kW solar system.
But a typical rooftop PV system now has a <a href="http://pv-map.apvi.org.au/analyses" target="_blank">rating</a> of 5-15kW, and many homes lack the roof space needed to install a larger system. Ways to address this are described below.
Road to success
A typical car <a href="https://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au/pages/Information/VehicleEmissions" target="_blank">produces</a> about 190 grams of CO2 per kilometre of travel, and the average Australian car <a href="http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/australian-moterists-drive-%20average-15530km-201305090702" target="_blank">travels</a> 15,500 km per year, thus producing 3 tonnes of CO2.
Moderately priced electric cars are expected to be widely available in the early 2020s, which can travel about 6,000 km for each MWh of electricity consumed.
Once the premium for an electric vehicle drops below about A$10,000, the lifetime cost of an electric car (including buying, maintaining and charging it) will be competitive with conventional cars.
A 2kW PV panel on your house roof will produce enough electricity for 16,000km of electric car driving per year, thus offsetting your entire emissions from motoring (3 tonnes of CO2), assuming you drive an average amount each year and previously drove a conventional model.
Off the gas
Most natural gas use within a home is for water and space heating. Gas can readily be replaced by electric heat pumps, which move heat from the air outside the home into your hot water tank or reverse cycle air conditioning system. <a href="http://www.eec.org.au/for-energy-users/technologies-2/heat-pumps" target="_blank">Heat pumps</a> typically move four units of heat for each unit of electricity consumed and can be readily powered by rooftop solar panels, supplemented by electricity from the grid.
For the average household, replacement gas with heat pumps can readily reduce household greenhouse gas emissions by up to 5 tonnes per year, at lower lifecycle cost than using gas. Replacement of gas cookers with electric induction cookers allows elimination of gas altogether from the home.
Fly less
Limiting air travel is one of the most effective tactics to cut your personal emissions. Short-haul flights or flights with few passengers <a href="https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/research/energy/downloads/jardine09-carboninflights.pdf" target="_blank">increase</a> the emissions intensity per passenger. A mostly full return trip from Australia to London (34,000km) will typically generate about 4 tonnes of CO₂ per passenger.
When you do decide to fly, think about how you can offset the emissions directly. Adding 1kW to your rooftop PV system can offset one return trip to London for one person every 3 years.
Will it pay for itself?
Now that we’ve looked at these various strategies, let’s now consider a family home with three occupants and one car. A 10kW PV system on the roof can make a substantial reduction in their greenhouse footprint by offsetting 14 tonnes of CO2 per year. Switching to an electric car saves 3 tonnes per year and substituting electric heat pumps for gas saves a further 1- 5 tonnes per year.
An additional 5 kW of rooftop PV is needed to neutralise an average amount of air travel, and to power the electric car and heat pumps. This 15kW system would cost about A$20,000 up front and would last 25 years. However, rooftop PV systems are now so cheap compared with the retail electricity tariff that the money invested is generally recovered within 10 years.
The total emissions savings estimated above are about 25 tonnes per year, per household, which is still significantly short of the 63 tonnes (on average) that this family emits. To be fully carbon-neutral, one option is for the family to invest in a wind or solar farm.
The required share of a wind farm or solar farm is about 10 kW or 20 kW respectively per three-person family, noting that a 3MW wind turbine produces nearly double the amount of electricity per year of a 3MW PV farm (single axis tracking), which in turn produces 40% more electricity per year than an equivalent amount of roof-mounted solar panels.
The up-front cost of this investment would be about A$25,000 per family, and it would return a steady income sufficient to repay the initial outlay (with interest) over the 25-year lifetime of the system.
So in summary, assuming that you have the means to meet the (not insubstantial) upfront costs, doing your part to preserve a living and vibrant planet for our children ultimately has a low or even negative net cost.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103922/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;">
Andrew Blakers, Professor of Engineering, Australian National 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/how-to-neutralise-your-greenhouse-gas-footprint-103922" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

How to neutralise your greenhouse gas footprint: ANU's Andrew Blakers

<html><body>
<div>
PUF Ventures Australia has formed an alliance with Utilities Group, a private company which operates proprietary bioHubs which turn manure, sewage, crop and food processing waste into renewable energy and bioproducts. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>The Casino bioHub project is already in early stage planning.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
Utilitas Group is working with ASX-listed DomaCom to raise the $4.3 million needed to develop the project.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The bioHub will transform organic waste and waste water from the <a href="https://www.domacom.com.au/public-crowdfunding-campaigns/commercial-properties/casino-biohub/" target="_blank">Richmond Valley region</a> into energy, clean water and other valuable bio-products. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>PVA has plans to construct a one million-square-foot greenhouse operation, with large scale manufacturing, processing and office facilities for the cultivation, production and manufacture of medical cannabis and associated products near the town of Casino, in the Northern Rivers region of New South Wales, Australia.  </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
Utilitas Group is developing a bioHub, near the same location which will transform organic waste and waste water from the Richmond Valley region into energy, clean water and other valuable bio-products. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Through the alliance, PVA will have long term access to stable environmentally friendly energy, nutrients and reclaimed water generated by the Utilitas bioHub. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>“There are significant economic and environmental benefits to be gained through the alliance with Utilitas,” said Horsfall, CEO of PUF Ventures Australia.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>“The Utilitas bioHub in Casino, New South Wales, has been designed to create dispatchable renewable electricity, green natural gas, carbon dioxide (CO2), valuable nutrients and reclaimed water as part of a closed-loop resource recovery process. These are all critical inputs for a large greenhouse operation. “ </div>
<div> </div>
<div>“Together with Utilitas, we can create the world’s first closed-loop, resource recovery, medicinal cannabisfacility, utilising the huge local biomass from the agricultural and food processing industries to pioneer world-leading clean technologies.”  </div>
<div> </div>
<div>“I give high praise to the Richmond Valley Council for its proactive efforts in securing such a high value anchor tenant like PUF Ventures Australia to co-locate with the Casino bioHub,” said Fiona Waterhouse, CEO, Utilitas Group.  </div>
<div> </div>
<div>“Securing PUF Ventures to have local, affordable clean energy and nutrients to grow healthy plants andaffordable long-term price is a win for the region, community, and environment. It’s also going to create new, local employment, and reduce environmental impacts from waste and emissions.”  </div>
<div> </div>
<div>The long-term success of any licensed cannabis producer is the ability to leverage economies of scale in its grow operations and be a low-cost producer with a premium product. Those companies with state-of-the-art operations with long term access to affordable energy and nutrients, which are critical cost drivers, will be successful.  </div>
<div> </div>
<div>About Utilitas  Utilitas is on a mission to unleash the power of bioHubs to fuel industry, support networks andenergise communities by delivering 100MW of dispatchable, reliable, local electricity and other bioproducts from 100 bioHubs in 100 regional communities by 2025. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
Utilitas originates, designs, builds and operates the bioHubs, contracting with large organic waste producers and energy consumers to treat their waste andsupply back energy (electricity, gas, fuel) and other valuable bioproducts at locked in long term prices.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
PUF Ventures Australia PTY LTD and PUF Ventures Inc have formed a strategic partnership with the Richmond Valley Council, New South Wales, Australia, to construct a 1 million-square-foot greenhouse operation, with large scale manufacturing, processing and office facilities for the cultivation, production and manufacture of medical cannabis andassociated products in Australia. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
PUF Ventures Inc. owns a majority interest in AAA Heidelberg Inc., a private Ontario company that is an advanced applicant for an ACMPR license from Health Canada.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Through an exclusive joint venture agreement with Canopy Growth Corp, the Company will join CraftGrow, a collection of high-quality cannabis grown by a select and diverse set of producers, made available through the Tweed Main Street website.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>DomaCom is a <a href="https://www.domacom.com.au/public-crowdfunding-campaigns/commercial-properties/casino-biohub/" target="_blank">fractional property investment</a> platform.</div>
</body></html>

Utilitas Group working with DomaCom to raise $4.3 million to develop Casino bioHub project 

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/65345/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The Earth’s last intact wilderness areas are shrinking dramatically. In a recently published paper we showed that the world has lost 3.3 million square kilometres of wilderness (around 10 percent of the total wilderness area) since 1993.
Hardest hit were South America, which has experienced a 30 percent wilderness loss, and Africa, which has lost 14 percent.
These areas are the final strongholds for endangered biodiversity. They are also essential for sustaining complex ecosystem processes at a regional and planetary scale. Finally, wilderness areas are home to, and provide livelihoods for, indigenous peoples, including many of the world’s most politically and economically marginalised communities.
But there’s another important service that many wilderness areas provide: they store vast amounts of carbon. If we’re to meet our international climate commitments, it is essential that we preserve these vital areas.
Climate consequences
Large, intact ecosystems store more terrestrial carbon than disturbed and degraded ones. They are also far more resilient to disturbances such as rapid climate change and fire.
For instance, the boreal forest remains the largest ecosystem undisturbed by humans. It stores roughly a third of the world’s terrestrial carbon.
Yet this globally significant wilderness area is increasingly threatened by forestry, oil and gas exploration, human-lit fires and climate change. These collectively threaten a biome-wide depletion of its carbon stocks, considerably worsening global warming. Our research shows that more than 320,000sqkm of boreal forest has been lost in the past two decades.
Similarly, in Borneo and Sumatra in 1997, human-lit fires razed recently logged forests that housed large carbon stores. This released billions of tonnes of carbon, which some estimate was equivalent to 40 percent of annual global emissions from fossil fuels. We found that more than 30 percent of tropical forest wilderness was lost since the early 1990s, with only 270,000sqkm left on the planet.
How do we stop the loss?
All nations need to step up and mobilise conservation investments that can help protect vanishing wilderness areas. These efforts will vary based on the specific circumstances of different nations. But there is a clear priority everywhere to focus on halting current threats – including road expansion, destructive mining, unsustainable forestry and large-scale agriculture – and enforcing existing legal frameworks.
For example, most of the world’s remaining tropical rainforests are under an onslaught of development pressures. Much of sub-Saharan Africa is being opened up by over 50,000km of planned “development corridors” that criss-cross the continent. These will slice deep into remaining wild places.
In the Amazon, plans are being made to construct more than 300 large hydroelectric dams across the basin. Each dam will require networks of new roads for dam and powerline construction and maintenance.
In northern Australia, schemes are afoot to transform the largest savannah on Earth into a food bowl, jeopardising its extensive carbon stores and biodiversity.
We need to enforce existing regulatory frameworks aimed at protecting imperilled species and ecosystems. We also need to develop new conservation policies that provide land stewards with incentives to protect intact ecosystems. These must be implemented at a large scale.
For example, conservation interventions in and around imperilled wilderness landscapes should include creating large protected areas, establishing mega-corridors between those protected areas, and enabling indigenous communities to establish community conservation reserves.
In Sabah, Borneo, scientists from the UK’s Royal Society have been working with local government to establish networks of interlinked reserves stretching from the coast to the interior mountains. This provides a haven for wildlife that migrate seasonally to find new food sources.
Funding could also be used to establish ecosystem projects that recognise the direct and indirect economic values that intact landscapes supply. These include providing a secure source of fresh water, reducing disaster risks and storing vast quantities of carbon.
For example, in Ecuador and Costa Rica, cloud forests are being protected to provide cities below with a year-round source of clean water. In Madagascar, carbon funding is saving one of the most biodiversity-rich tropical forests on the planet, the Makira forest.
We argue for immediate, proactive action to protect the world’s remaining wilderness areas, because the alarming loss of these lands results in significant and irreversible harm for nature and humans. Protecting the world’s last wild places is a cost-effective conservation investment and the only way to ensure that some semblance of intact nature survives for the benefit of future generations.
James Watson is associate professor, The University of Queensland and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/james-watson-104823" target="_blank">here</a>.
Bill Laurance is distinguished research professor and Australian Laureate, James Cook University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bill-laurance-4358" target="_blank">here</a>.
Brendan Mackey is director of the Griffith Climate Change Response Program, Griffith University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/brendan-mackey-152282" target="_blank">here</a>.
James Allan is PhD candidate, School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, The University of Queensland and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/james-allan-296281" target="_blank">here</a>.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

The world’s carbon stores are going up in smoke with vanishing wilderness

<html><body>
<h2>
GUEST OBSERVER  
</h2>
Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg told Q&amp;A that Australia has the highest number of solar panels on people's roofs per capita anywhere in the world. Is that right? 
Solar photovoltaics (PV) technology produces electricity directly from solar energy. When you see a solar panel on a household roof, it’s most likely solar PV technology at work within those shiny blue or black, silver-framed plates. (If not, they’re likely to be solar hot water system panels.) 
Solar PV has made a valuable contribution towards reducing Australia’s very high per-capita greenhouse emissions from electricity generation. 
Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg’s told Q&amp;A viewers that Australia has more household solar panels, per head of population, than anywhere in the world.
Let’s check the claim against the available evidence.
Checking the source 
When asked for a source to support his assertion, a spokesman for the minister clarified he was talking about solar PV systems only (not solar hot water).
He referred The Conversation to a document produced by the Energy Supply Association of Australia (which has since been folded into the new Australian Energy Council). The document said that:
"Australia clearly leads the world in the installation of household scale distributed solar PV. Australia has double the residential solar PV penetration rates of the next country (Belgium), and more than three times the penetration of Germany and the UK … By 2015, more than one in seven Australian households had installed solar PV. This is a 15% penetration rate across all Australian households."
We can check this assertion independently using a combination of data from:
<ul>
<li>the Australian PV Institute’s database of PV systems less than 10 kilowatts registered with the Australian Clean Energy Regulator and;</li>
<li>a March 2015 data set from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) called Household and Family Projections, Australia.</li>
</ul>
Note that the kilowatt (kW) capacity here refers to the size of the PV system, and represents the maximum power (Watts) the system generates in the middle of a sunny day.
A typical PV panel is rated at around 250 Watts (0.25kW). A typical residential PV system in Australia is sized somewhere between 1.5-5kW, or 6 to 20 panels. As a basis for comparison, a typical air-conditioner typically consumes around 1-2kW when running. 
For our calculation, we assumed that all systems less than 10kW are installed on household premises (although, in fact, a few are installed on small businesses and community buildings such as surf clubs and schools). 
Here's what the data shows:
<div class="content" data-raw="">
So Frydenberg has actually likely slightly underestimated the proportion of Australian households with a PV system. It’s not 15 percent – it’s more like 16.5 percent, according to the latest data.
PV systems are not evenly distributed across Australia’s residential sector, as the Australian PV Institute’s live PV map shows:
</div>
<div class="content" data-raw="">
<a href="/images/2016/03/29/image-20160323-28111-8pnjzx.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/03/29/image-20160323-28111-8pnjzx.png" alt="">
</div>
<div class="content" data-raw=""> </div>
<div class="content" data-raw="">PV installation by post code. Note: The percentages on the map are higher than the 16.5% figure, as the percentage of dwellings with a PV system shown on the map is estimated by comparing the number of freestanding and semi-detatched dwellings from the 2011 census with the number of residential PV systems installed in each area (rather than using a figure including all dwellings scaled up in line with population growth projections). Australian PV Institute (APVI) Solar Map, funded by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, accessed from pv-map.apvi.org.au on 23 March 2016.</div>
<div class="content" data-raw="">
<div class="enlarge_hint"> </div>
<div class="enlarge_hint"><a href="/images/2016/03/29/image-20160323-28072-19k2p6b.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div class="enlarge_hint">  
</div>
<img src="/images/2016/03/29/image-20160323-28072-19k2p6b.png" alt="">
</div>
<div class="content" data-raw=""> </div>
<div class="content" data-raw="">Note: The percentages on the map are higher than the 16.5% figure, as the percentage of dwellings with a PV system shown on the map is estimated by comparing the number of freestanding and semi-detatched dwellings from the 2011 census with the number of residential PV systems installed in each area (rather than using a figure including all dwellings scaled up in line with population growth projections). Australian PV Institute (APVI) Solar Map, funded by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, accessed from pv-map.apvi.org.au on 23 March 2016. </div>
<div class="content" data-raw=""> </div>
<div class="content" data-raw="">
Is Australia the world leader when it comes to solar PV per capita?
Yes. Australia does likely have the highest proportion of households with PV systems on their roof of any country in the world.
But to be clear, Australia does not have the most PV rooftop capacityinstalled per person. By that we mean there are a number of other countries that currently generate a higher proportion of their total electricity from PV than Australia.
Those countries may also have larger commercial and industrial PV systems (often tens to hundreds of kilowatts in size) or utility PV plants (which can be a megawatt – 1,000 kilowatts – to tens of megawatts in size).
Australia is unusual in that some 85 percent of its installed PV capacity is small systems less than 10kW.
Indeed, the latest International Energy Agency (IEA) Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme Task 1 trends report ranks Australia fourth or fifth for overall PV capacity, based on 2014 data:
Note, however, that not all countries with high PV penetrations are included in the IEA report. Greece, for example, gets around the same proportion of its electricity from solar PV as Germany.
There are also a number of small island developing states with a high percentage of households with stand-alone solar home systems. For example, around 17 percent of households in Kiribati have a solar home system (based on 2013 data).
However, this isn’t really comparable with Australia because these PV systems in Kiribati are so tiny they can only power lighting and small appliances. Also, Kiribati’s population is only just over 100,000 people and many people on remote islands have no access to an electricity grid.
In 2014, Germany had more than nine times the installed PV capacity of Australia, yet around the same number of household PV systems spread over more than three times the population.
Italy had more than four times the PV capacity of Australia, yet less than half the number of household PV systems. Japan had around 15% more residential PV systems, but more than five times the population of Australia. Belgium has a population around half that of Australia, but only around one fifth the number of PV systems. Greece has less than a tenth of Australia’s PV capacity of small (&lt;10kW) PV systems.
Therefore, all of these countries have a significantly lower proportion of households with PV systems than Australia. They do better than Australia when it comes to total energy produced from solar; they do worse than Australia when it comes to household rooftop solar only.
So Frydenberg was right to say Australia has the highest proportion of households with PV systems on their roof in the world (well, that is if we don’t consider tiny countries like Kiribati).
<h2>Why is household rooftop solar so popular in Australia?</h2>
Australia’s unique PV market focus on households has come about through a combination of factors:
<ol>
<li>
Policy support from federal and state governments has historically focused particularly on PV systems less than 10kW, including the Solar Credit Multiplier available over 2009-2012 through the former Labor government’s revised Renewable Energy Target. There were also the various state-based feed-in tariffs over the same time period, which were generally restricted to small PV systems.
</li>
<li>
A large proportion of Australian housing comprises stand-alone dwellings with relatively large roof spaces suitable for PV systems.
</li>
<li>
Most of Australia has an excellent climate for PV systems with plenty of sunshine.
</li>
<li>
Australian households have to pay very high residential electricity prices compared to many other countries. PV systems can be a very cost effective way to reduce household electricity bills.
</li>
<li>
Australia’s relatively high rates of owner-occupier home ownership allows the benefits of the PV system investment to be captured by the home owner, who also pays the electricity bills.
</li>
</ol>
<h2>What does the future hold?</h2>
One final note: Australia may be at risk of losing the top ranking when it comes to household solar PV systems.
A growing number of countries are setting ambitious PV targets.
In Australia, some key electricity industry stakeholders here in Australia – including the distribution network utilities that own and operate the wires that run to your house – are looking to restrict future household PV connections in some areas, or reduce the money that households can save by installing PV systems.
Household PV does raise a number of technical challenges for these businesses, and their revenue under current electricity tariffs.
<h2>Verdict</h2>
Josh Frydenberg was correct. Australia almost certainly has the highest proportion of households with PV systems on their roof of any country in the world (again, not including tiny nations like Kiribati). His assertion that nearly 15% of Australian households have solar panels on their roofs was, indeed, perhaps a slight underestimate.
However, there are a number of other countries that currently generate a higher proportion of their overall electricity from PV than Australia.
Unlike these other PV markets, the great majority of PV systems in Australia are small-scale installations on household rooftops. If Australian governments are keen to see Australia retain its world leading position, greater policy, retail market and regulatory efforts will be required. 
Anna Bruce is lecturer in the School of Photovoltaic and Renewable Energy Engineering, UNSW Australia and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/anna-bruce-243843" target="_blank">here</a>.
Iain MacGill is co-director, Centre for Energy and Environmental Markets, UNSW Australia and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/iain-macgill-576" target="_blank">here</a>.
Both are authors for The Conversation.
</div>
</body></html>

Greenhouse

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Greenhouse

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News