The latest update on the state of New Zealand’s environment paints a concerning outlook for marine environments, especially amid the increasing push to use the marine estate for economic gain.
But many shallow coastal ecosystems remain largely unexplored. As our latest fieldwork shows, many of these areas are hotspots for protected species, but are largely unprotected from human impacts.
Gardens of the red calcified stylasterid hydrocoral off the coast of Doubtful Sound, Fiordland.
Ecosystems in the ‘middle’ light zone
Subtidal rocky reefs have been the focus of scientific research for centuries. During the past eight decades, with the advent of SCUBA diving, they have been studied even more intensively.
However, rocky reefs extend much deeper than most SCUBA divers can typically reach, into what is known as the mesophotic or “middle” light zone.
While seaweeds dominate in the well-lit shallow waters, there is limited light to sustain photosynthesis in the mesophotic zone below around 30 metres. The decline in seaweed creates more space for animals, which leads to the development of communities containing species not found in the shallows.
Deep-water stony corals at around 100 metres off the coast of Northland.
Because these ecosystems are no longer affected by surface wave action, they are often dominated by large, fragile three-dimensional species.
We still know very little about the ecology of the species that live in mesophotic ecosystems. Many are likely to be slow growing and long-lived, with some living for hundreds or possibly thousands of years.
Research is ongoing and empirical data still sparse, but observations show many fish are associated with these mesophotic communities. We eat some of them, or they are important within the ocean food web.
Diverse ecosystems and protected species
We shared some of the first high-resolution videos of New Zealand’s mesophotic ecosystems in 2022. Back then, we thought these deep-reef communities were dominated by sponges.
However, we have since deployed a Boxfish remotely operated vehicle more than 200 times around New Zealand and found sponges are not always the most dominant organism.
In fact, mesophotic ecosystems along New Zealand’s coast are very diverse, with regional variation in the types of communities.
Our team found sea squirts dominated communities off Rakiura Stewart Island, anemone stands in the Wellington region, red coral beds along the Fiordland coast and coral “reefs” in Northland.
Asicidian or sea squirt beds at 130 metres off the coast of Rakiura Stewart Island.
Importantly, many of these reefs support species protected under the Wildlife Act.
During our most recent trip to Doubtless Bay in Northland, we explored more than 20 locations. At many sites we encountered protected coral species. The term coral is broadly defined in the Wildlife Act – it includes groups such as black corals (order Antipatharia), gorgonian corals (Gorgonacea), stony corals (Scleractinia) and hydrocorals (family Stylasteridae).
Protected black coral and seafans at around 90 metres offshore at Doubtless Bay, Northland.
Under the Wildlife Act, it is illegal to deliberately collect or damage these species. If they are brought to the surface accidentally (in fishing gear or by anchors, for example), they must be returned to the sea immediately.
Many of these corals are typically considered deep-sea species, but they are commonly found in New Zealand’s mesophotic ecosystems. Northland’s mesophotic communities have examples from all these groups of corals, as well as other fragile ecosystems dominated by glass sponges.
While glass sponges are not protected, they are thought to be very slow growing, with some species living for thousands of years.
Glass sponge gardens at around 100 metres off the coast of Northland.
Current and future impacts
Many mesophotic organisms grow slowly and rely on food carried in the water. This makes them particularly sensitive to activities that disrupt the seafloor, such as fishing and anchoring, and to the effect of higher sediment loads.
Sediment can either smother or clog mesophotic organisms such as corals and sponges. Many of these species show some tolerance to sediment, but prolonged exposure or very high levels can kill them off.
Many of the mesophotic ecosystems we have explored show clear evidence of human impacts, including lost recreational fishing gear and anchor lines.
The government plans to maximise the economic potential of the marine estate and much of this development is focused on coastal areas. Any activities that generate coastal sediment plumes are of particular concern.
Seabed sand mining operations already occur at some sites around the coast of New Zealand. More have been proposed, potentially generating sediment plumes that could reach these mesophotic communities.
Protected black coral in a sponge garden at around 80 metres at the Poor Knights marine reserve in Northland.
A fundamental step for effective management of biodiversity is to understand its distribution. Our work over the past five years has characterised a wide range of mesophotic ecosystems, but there are still large areas of the New Zealand coastline that have not been explored. They are likely to contain undescribed communities.
As many regional councils around New Zealand are working through revisions to coastal policy plans, these deeper rocky reefs need to be fully included to protect the species they support.
Professor James J Bell receives funding from the Department of Conservation, Environment Southland, the George Mason Charitable Trust, The Royal Society of New Zealand, and the Greater Wellington Regional Council.
As the election campaign draws to a close, it’s safe to say both major parties have been quiet on climate change. While Labor policies have made some progress to decarbonise, the Coalition threatens to scrap or weaken them.
Around the world, more and more electric vehicles are hitting the road. Last year, more than 17 million battery-electric and hybrid vehicles were sold. Early forecasts suggest this year’s figure might reach 20 million. Nearly 20% of all cars sold today are electric.
But as more motorists go electric, it creates a new challenge – what to do with the giant batteries when they reach the end of their lives. That’s 12 to 15 years on average, though real-world data suggests it may be up to 40% longer. The average EV battery weighs about 450 kilograms.
By 2030, around 30,000 tonnes of EV batteries are expected to need disposal or recycling in Australia. By 2040, the figure is projected to be 360,000 tonnes and 1.6 million tonnes by 2050.
Is this a problem? Not necessarily. When a battery reaches the end of its life in a vehicle, it’s still got plenty of juice. Together, they could power smaller vehicles, houses or, when daisy-chained, even whole towns.
For this to work, though, we need better information. How healthy are these batteries? What are they made of? Have they ever been in an accident? At present, answers to these questions are hard to come by. That has to change.
Gauging the health and reliability of a used EV battery is harder than it should be.Fahroni/Shutterstock
Huge potential, challenging reality
Old EV batteries have huge potential. But it’s not going to be easy to realise this.
That’s because it’s hard to get accurate data on battery performance, how fast it’s degrading and the battery’s current state of health – how much capacity it has now versus how much it had when new.
Unfortunately, vehicle manufacturers often make it difficult to get access to this crucial information. And once a battery pack is removed, we can’t get access to its specific data.
This comes with real risks. If a battery has a fault or has been severely degraded, it could catch fire when opened or if used for an unsuitable role. Without data, recyclers are flying blind.
Reusing EV batteries will only be economically viable if there’s sufficient confidence in estimates of remaining capacity and performance.
Without solid data, investors and companies may hesitate to engage in the repurposing market due to the financial risks involved.
Extracting minerals from a battery
EV batteries are full of critical minerals such as nickel, cobalt, lithium and manganese. Nearly everything in an EV battery can be recycled – up to 95%.
Here, too, it’s not as easy as it should be. Manufacturers design batteries focusing on performance and safety with recyclability often an afterthought.
Battery packs are often sealed shut for safety, making it difficult to disassemble their thousands of individual cells. Dismantling these type of EV batteries is extremely labour-intensive and time-consuming. Some will have to be crushed and the minerals extracted afterwards.
EV batteries have widely differing chemistries, such as lithium iron phosphate and nickel manganese cobalt. But this vital information is often not included on the label.
EV batteries require significant quantities of critical minerals. Pictured: lithium salt evaporation ponds in Argentina.Freedom_wanted/Shutterstock
Better ways of assessing battery health
Used EV batteries fall into three groups based on their state of health:
High (80% or more of original capacity): These batteries can be refurbished for reuse in similar applications, such as electric cars, mopeds, bicycles and golf carts. Some can be resized to suit smaller vehicles.
Medium (60-80%): These batteries can be repurposed for entirely different applications, such as stationary power storage or uninterruptible power supplies.
Low (below 60%): These batteries undergo shredding and refining processes to recover valuable minerals which can be used to make new batteries.
Researchers have recently succeeded in estimating the health of used EV batteries even without access to the battery’s data. But access to usage and performance data would still give better estimates.
What’s at stake?
An EV battery is a remarkable thing. But they rely on long supply chains and contain critical minerals, and their manufacture can cause pollution and carbon emissions.
Ideally, an EV battery would be exhausted before we recycle it. Repurposing these batteries will help reduce how many new batteries are needed.
If old batteries are stockpiled or improperly discarded, it leads to fire risk and potential contamination of soil and water.
Right now, it’s hard for companies and individuals to access each battery’s performance data. This means it’s much harder and more expensive to assess its health and remaining useful life. As a result, more batteries are being discarded or sent for recycling too early.
Recycling EV batteries is a well-defined process. But it’s energy-intensive and requires significant chemical treatments.
What needs to change?
At present, many battery manufacturers are wary of sharing battery performance data, due to concerns over intellectual property and other legal issues. This will have to change if society is to get the fullest use out of these complex energy storage devices. But these changes are unlikely to come from industry.
In 2021, California introduced laws requiring manufacturers to give recyclers access to data and battery state of health. Likewise, the European Union will require all EV batteries to come with a digital passport from January 2027, giving access to data on the battery’s health, chemistry and records of potentially harmful events such as accidents or charging at extreme temperatures.
Australia should follow suit – before we have a mountain of EV batteries and no way to reuse them.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
At the same time, climate change is getting worse. Last year was Australia’s second?hottest on record. Global warming is leading to more frequent and severe bushfires, floods and heatwaves.
These two crises feed each other. Energy-hungry homes strain the grid on hot days, and urban sprawl locks residents into in long car commutes. And dangerous, climate-driven disasters damage homes and push insurance bills higher.
It makes policy sense to deal with both crises in tandem. So what are Labor, the Coalition and the Greens offering on both climate action and housing, and are they fixing both problems together?
A returned Labor government would also allow first home buyers to use a 5% deposit to purchase a property. And it would invest in modern construction methods to speed up the building process and make housing more affordable.
The verdict: Labor’s plan represents progress on both climate and housing policy, but the two are moving on separate tracks.
Buildings account for almost a quarter of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. But Labor has not made any assurances that the promised new homes will have minimal climate impact.
Labor’s commitment to new construction methods is welcome. Modern solutions such as prefabricated housing can substantially reduce emissions.
However, the spending represents only a tiny proportion of Labor’s $33 billion housing plans.
A Dutton-led government would also freeze building standard improvements for a decade, because it claims some improvements make homes more expensive.
On climate change, it would review Labor’s 43% emissions-reduction target, expand gas production and build small modular nuclear reactors at seven former coal sites.
The verdict: The Coalition’s housing and climate policies are not integrated. And while freezing changes to the national building code might lower the upfront costs of buying a home, it may prevent the introduction of more stringent energy-efficiency standards. This would both contribute to the climate problem and lock in higher power bills.
The party says its housing plans slash energy bills and emissions, because more homes would be energy-efficient and powered by clean energy.
The verdict: The Greens offer the most integrated climate-housing policy vision. But its plan may not be feasible. It would require massive public expenditure, significant tax reform, and logistical capabilities beyond current government capacity.
An integrated fix matters
Neither Labor, the Coalition nor the Greens has proposed a truly integrated, feasible policy framework to tackle the issues of housing and climate together.
Resilient, net-zero homes are not a luxury. They are a necessary tool for reaching Australia’s emissions-reduction goals.
And government policy to tackle both housing and climate change should extend beyond new homes. None of the three parties offers a clear timetable to retrofit millions of draughty houses or protect low-income households from heat, flood and bushfire, or has proposed binding national policies to stop new homes being built on flood plains.
Whichever party forms the next government, it must ensure housing and climate policies truly pull in the same direction.
Dr. Ehsan Noroozinejad has received funding from both national and international organisations to support research addressing housing and climate crises. His most recent funding on integrated housing and climate policy comes from the James Martin Institute for Public Policy (soon to be the Australian Public Policy Institute).
Integrity organisation claims Australians for Natural Gas overstates role of gas in economy and failed to disclose directors’ links to industry on website
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has been asked to investigate allegedly misleading claims made by Australians for Natural Gas, a pro-gas group with directors who include a gas industry executive and a Liberal candidate running in the federal election.
Lawyers acting for Climate Integrity, a not-for-profit focused on corporate accountability, have filed a complaint with the ACCC. They argue that the website and advertising materials of Australians for Natural Gas have failed to disclose its directors’ links to the gas industry and Liberal party, and overinflated the role of gas in the economy and energy transition.
Conservationists fear fallout from president’s proclamation on fishing in federally protected area of Pacific Ocean
Environmental conservation groups are expressing major concerns over Donald Trump’s recent proclamation to reverse fishing regulations across the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine national monument, a federally protected area in the central Pacific Ocean spanning nearly 500,000 sq miles.
As one of the most pristine tropical marine environments in the world, the monument is now at risk following Trump’s decision last week to unleash American commercial fishing in the area with far-reaching environmental consequences.
