They may look like a fluffy flying carpet, but greater gliders are not as great at gliding as previously thought, Australian researchers have discovered.
The first study to measure the aerial ability of Australia’s largest gliding marsupial has found they soar across an average distance of 19 metres – far shorter than the 100 metres suggested in an 85-year-old study.
We got our first feline hero in 1971 when Matthew Flinders’ heartfelt tribute to his pet Trim was discovered
In 1872, the city of Melbourne hosted its first cat show one year after London’s Crystal Palace debuted its first show. By 1885, “cats were seldom treated very well” in Australia, according to a writer in the Victorian Almanac that year – but they were pleased to report that Australians were starting to appreciate them more.
The colonial newspapers were also beginning to report on a curious fad: “the cult of the cat”, which saw the humble moggie, once viewed as a back-alley scavenger or nondescript companion of women and children, transformed into a fashionable commodity in places like London. Cat breeding became a popular and lucrative pastime for mainly upper- and middle-class women and men, with fancy breeds, like Persians, selling for hefty sums. As the cat economy picked up, British newspapers were filled with “pages of cat business” as cat-loving contributors shared regular updates on litters, feline purchases and ribbons acquired at prestigious shows.
Mayor of London backs calls from unions to update health and safety rules in light of more frequent heatwaves
The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is backing calls for a maximum workplace temperature as pressure grows on the government to protect workers from the impact of repeated heatwaves across the UK.
The extreme heat has left people struggling to cope as temperatures in some workplaces climb above 40C, causing thousands of schools to close and hospital and transport systems to break down.
Australia is a world leader when it comes to adopting rooftop solar systems. But our solar transition is leaving renters and apartment dwellers behind.
According to the latest census, almost one-third of Australians rent their homes, live in apartments or are connected to private energy networks. These households are largely unable to benefit from rooftop solar.
Our research shows the reasons for this include limited roof space, relatively high costs for upgrading switchboards and wiring, and long approval wait times. Landlords may also be reluctant to install solar as any energy bill savings go directly to renters.
So renters and apartment dwellers face multiple obstacles in accessing free solar energy. That’s where plug-in solar comes in.
Plug-in solar systems – also known as balcony solar because they can be hung off balcony balustrades – are a convenient, low-cost way for households to take control of their energy use.
But there are several reasons why these systems aren’t being rolled out across Australia.
What are plug-in systems?
Plug-in solar systems are generally made of one or two solar photovoltaic panels, which turn sunlight into electricity. They also have a micro-inverter, which converts solar-generated electricity into the type of electricity that can power household appliances.
These “mini power plants” just need a standard power plug to work. So unlike rooftop systems, they are easily installed and removed without the help of an electrician. Many also include a battery, which stores any extra electricity.
Germany is spearheading the uptake of plug-in technology, with more than 1.2 million systems now installed across the country. The technology has recently also been legalised in other European nations such as France and Austria, as well as the United Kingdom and many jurisdictions in the United States.
Plug-in solar systems could help Australians save hundreds of dollars on their annual power bills. However, the exact benefits depend on what kind of home you have and how you use energy.
We used the Nationwide Home Energy Rating Scheme Whole of Home tool to estimate how much households in Australia’s capital cities could save by installing a one-kilowatt plug-in solar system that is vertical, unshaded and faces true north. A household in Canberra could save A$226 each year. In Adelaide, this figure rises to $372.
This equates to about 13% in savings, based on the average amount Australians pay in annual energy bills. This may be even higher for low-income households, which typically use less electricity than other households.
If this is to change, we must overcome three main obstacles.
Technical challenges
Currently, no tested or certified plug-in solar systems are available in Australia. This means existing technical standards and safety rules don’t account for this new technology. More research is needed to understand how we can use plug-in systems safely, and how they may affect the wider electricity grid. This will determine if we place limits on how big these systems are and whether they can be exported. It will also tell us if we must update Australia’s household wiring standards.
Australian rental and strata laws are a major barrier to adopting plug-in systems. These laws give landlords and body-corporates – legal bodies that manage shared property such as an apartment block – more control over building upgrades than the people living in the homes. However, Germany has changed its rules to empower households. For example, German landlords and body-corporates can’t unreasonably block plug?in balcony solar systems, say if they simply don’t like how the systems look.
Social challenges
Our research shows many renters and vulnerable households want more climate?friendly homes. However, they may not make any concrete changes because they lack information or mistrust new technologies. To ensure all Australians benefit from renewable energy systems, we need solutions that suit different kinds of households and are co-designed with local communities.
In Australia, we’re not yet ready to install plug?in solar systems. But portable power stations are already available, and could help more Australians benefit from free solar power.
Portable power stations are indoor battery packs charged via a household powerpoint. These packs are able to store free daytime electricity for later use and have sockets to connect lights, small appliances and devices such as TVs, computers and phones. These stations can be installed in Australia without the approval of an electrician, landlord or strata body.
The new federal Solar Sharer Offer and Victoria’s upcoming Midday Power Saver provide free midday electricity tariffs to eligible households. Electricity tariffs determine how much you pay for the energy you consume. Free midday tariffs are most helpful for households who can use a lot of power over lunchtime.
For people who aren’t as flexible, however, portable power stations allow the storage of this free midday electricity to use at other times. This combination may also benefit people living in high-rise apartments, where it’s difficult to install rooftop solar. But some people may need support to buy and use them efficiently.
Australia is making ground in our clean energy transition. But we must develop safe and affordable ways for all households to switch to renewable electricity.
Nicola Willand has received research funding from the Australian Research Council, Victorian government, Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation, Future Fuels Collaborative Research Centre, National Health and Medical Research Council, British Academy and Energy Consumers Australia. She is a trustee of the Fuel Poverty Research Network charity and is affiliated with the Australian Institute of Architects.
Alan Pears has received funding from the RACE for 2030 Cooperative Research Centre. He is a member of the advisory panel of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. He provides advice to a number of community groups and industry associations and, in some cases, receives payment for this input. However, his paid consulting work is not associated with residential energy issues.
Mike Roberts has received research funding from the RACE for 2030 Cooperative Research Centre, Australian government, New South Wales government, Energy Consumers Australia, Ausgrid and Essential Energy. He is a former director and chair of the Australian Photovoltaic Institute.
Xiufang Li has previously received a grant funded by AusNet, which is not related to the topics discussed in this article.
When you think about threats to the Great Barrier Reef, coral bleaching due to climate change would likely be first.
But the world’s largest reef system faces many threats. One surprisingly large threat is poor water quality. When sediment is washed off farms, cities and bushland into rivers, it can be transported kilometres offshore. If there’s too much, it can smother corals and seagrass meadows. Fertiliser and pesticide residue can make things worse.
Unlike the global problem of climate change, water quality is a threat Australia can directly address. The issue has been repeatedly flagged by UNESCO, the United Nations body responsible for World Heritage areas such as the reef. In its latest draft decision – the fourth since 2023 – water quality remains a major issue, alongside climate change.
The draft decision notes “with utmost concern, the continuing negative impacts on hard coral cover across the Reef” and asks the Australian government to report on the damage done by coral bleaching in 2024–25 as well as poor water quality, unsustainable fishing practices and poorly managed uses of coastal land. The draft decision also requests an assessment of the impacts caused by dumping sediments from dredging in coastal waters.
In April, the Queensland and federal governments released a revised strategy to improve water quality. Previous plans have talked the talk but failed to deliver.
The new strategy is also likely to disappoint. It relies on broad vision statements without clear responsibilities, an adequate budget or realistic actions.
Water pollution is the biggest local threat
For years, one of the biggest local threats to the reef’s ecosystems has been land-based runoff.
Shallow seagrass meadows act as nurseries for fish and food for turtles and dugong. Like all plants, seagrass requires light to survive. If too much sediment blocks light or settles on a plant’s leaves, it can die. This is often worst after storms or cyclones, which churn up seas and mix sediment back into the water. Coral can be similarly hard-hit, especially if the sediments are laced with pesticides and other contaminants.
To improve water quality, farmers need to reduce sediment washing into rivers and reduce fertiliser and pesticide use. But it’s not just farms – runoff from industries, cities and towns also contributes.
Progress has been made to reduce fertiliser overuse. But Australia has repeatedly missed its own targets to cut water pollutants such as sediments, pesticides and dissolved inorganic nitrogen from fertilisers.
The federal and state governments have remained largely silent about these missed targets in favour of focusing on water quality successes, community involvement and investment.
Reasons for concerns about the new strategy
The recently released water quality strategy was delayed, with the previous plan expiring in 2022. Drawing on the latest Scientific Consensus Statement and two decades of monitoring, the plan proposes solutions such as better land management, rehabilitating mangroves, seagrass and wetlands and updated targets.
Despite that, the plan is unlikely to achieve what it’s meant to.
Implementation. It’s not clear how the updated strategy will become reality. Previous strategies have suffered due to insufficient funding or limited success.
Funding is uncertain. We estimate less than 25% of the funds necessary to meet the water quality targets have been invested by governments since 2003. The 2026 strategy and revised targets do not come with costings.
Lack of coordination. Too often, aspirations set by one government department clash with another. When land is cleared for farming, the farm industry can grow. But cleared land leads to more sediment washing into waterways. Between 2018 and 2022, more than 680,000 hectares of land were cleared across the reef’s 35 river catchments. Of this, almost 90% was for livestock grazing. Last year’s federal environment law reforms were meant to protect the trees and shrubs growing along rivers but much work is still required.
There are other reasons to be concerned. To date, much of the funding from the Queensland government has gone to voluntary programs to improve farming practices – despite limited evidence these programs represent the best approach to improve water quality.
Inspections of sugarcane and banana farms show almost 50% aren’t compliant with regulations meant to protect the reef.
As climate change worsens and water quality problems persist, authorities are increasingly worried about the future of the Great Barrier Reef.
Last year, the International Union for Conservation of Nature rated its condition as “critical”. The 2024 Outlook Report from the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority describes the long-term outlook as very poor, with water quality efforts only “partially effective”.
In February 2026, a massive sediment plume flowed from the flooded Burdekin River out to the Great Barrier Reef.Copernicus Sentinel, CC BY-NC-ND
The reef faces a dire future. Efforts are being made, but there are reasons for onging concerns after years of missed targets, incomplete compliance and inadequate funding.
The latest water quality plan will only work if the federal and state governments invest more in evidence-based solutions, such as better management of river catchments, continuous improvements in farming practices, stronger actions to protect riverside vegetation, improving stormwater and sewage management and reducing deforestation, earthworks and marine debris.
Later this month, UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee will consider the draft decision. Then the ball will be back in Australia’s court. It remains to be seen whether authorities will properly address major threats such as poor water quality.
The authors would like to acknowledge the input of environmental scientist Dr Maximilian Hirschfeld.
Jon Day worked for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority between 1986 and 2014, and was one of its directors between 1998 and 2014. He represented Australia as one of the formal delegates to the World Heritage Committee between 2007-2011.
Rob Coles provides environmental advice to port authorities and coastal management agencies and has received research funding from government and industry sources.
