Heat caused 2,300 deaths across 12 cities, of which 1,500 were down to climate crisis, scientists say
Planet-heating pollution tripled the death toll from the “quietly devastating” heatwave that seared Europe at the end of June, early analysis covering a dozen cities has found, as experts warned of a worsening health crisis that is being overlooked.
Scientists estimate that high heat killed 2,300 people across 12 major cities as temperatures soared across Europe between 23 June and 2 July. They attributed 1,500 of the deaths to climate breakdown, which has heated the planet and made the worst extremes even hotter.
NZ Post committed to cutting its emissions by 32% by 2030 (based on 2018 levels), but recently announced it would abandon its climate target.
The company was part of the Science Based Target initiative (SBTi), the leading international body allowing businesses worldwide to set and validate targets which they can then promote as backed by science.
More than 10,000 businesses have joined SBTi and the database currently includes 36 New Zealand businesses with active targets or commitments.
NZ Post was one of the early adopters of SBTi in New Zealand. Its initial commitment in 2018 included not only the company’s own direct emissions (known as scope 1) but also purchased energy (scope 2) and other indirect emissions (known as scope 3, such as emissions from air freight or waste disposal).
In the past few years, NZ Post has signalled its intention to update its target to pursue even greater reductions of 42%. In 2023, it made a commitment to align itself with a pathway to achieve net zero by 2050.
But the company has now decided to fully withdraw from SBTi. NZ Post’s website announcement states:
After careful consideration and a thorough assessment of both technical feasibility and financial implications, it has become clear that our target is no longer feasible at a technical level and, given the scale of investment required, under present economic conditions.
NZ Post seems to have found itself in the contradiction between economic objectives and climate action. Ambitious climate action seems to rarely win such a battle.
The company was already questioning its ability to meet its SBTi targets in its 2022 and 2023 climate disclosures. Its parcel volumes were growing and it struggled with emissions associated with heavy freight and aviation.
It also stated its emissions had increased due to the acquisition of Fliway Group, improved supply-chain data, and emission factor changes. This indicated it would struggle to meet even less ambitious climate targets.
Why this is a problem
One might commend NZ Post for their transparency in disclosing their decision to withdraw from SBTi. However, so far the announcement hasn’t been included in the company’s media releases and remains tucked away in the sustainability section.
The broader issue is that businesses can use SBTi to gain reputational value without following up with required decarbonisation. The current SBTi setup has some limitations that allow such behaviour.
For instance, companies can make an SBTi commitment and promote it for two years before having to submit an actual target for validation. Businesses can also promote their SBTi targets for years without making required progress. Finally, some SBTi businesses provide limited reporting, making assessment of their progress difficult.
In a 2025 consultation, SBTi acknowledged some of these problems and signalled its plan to enhance tracking and accountability.
Climate action vs profitability
There are other issues that make transparency limited. For instance, businesses such as Air New Zealand seem to be able to withdraw from the SBTi and fully disappear from the SBTi public target dashboard, making it difficult to track those that have decided to withdraw.
In business contexts, climate action remains subordinate to profitability and revenue growth objectives. Hence, not many businesses are willing to pursue all potential ways to meet their targets as this would require making difficult decisions around economic objectives.
Many companies struggle to make progress towards science-based goals or don’t have credible transition plans aligned with the goal to keep overall warming at 1.5°C.
The question remains whether the current SBTi engagement of businesses genuinely reflects ambitious climate action or whether it is merely designed to give stakeholders the impression of global progress through symbolic commitments.
The more organisations committed to the science-based reductions, the greater our collective ability to achieve decarbonisation.
The opposite is true as well. The decision of NZ Post and other companies to drop their SBTi targets may diminish the collective ability of businesses in New Zealand to achieve decarbonisation aligning with global climate goals.
SBTi’s plan to implement new monitoring and reporting mechanisms would enhance accountability. However, it will not make meeting targets any easier. Committing to and promoting ambitious but potentially unrealistic targets can cause reputational damage.
A safer pathway for many businesses wanting to do as much as they can within the boundaries of the current economic system may be a public disclosure of their support for climate action, transparency about the actions the business is taking, and providing transparent and detailed emissions reporting.
Pii-Tuulia Nikula does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Have you ever gone to toss something into the recycling bin – a jam jar, a pizza box, a takeaway container encrusted with yesterday’s lunch – and wondered if you’re doing it right? Perhaps you asked yourself: should I scrub the jar with hot water? Scrape the mozzarella off the box? Wash off that palak paneer?
Research shows most Australians believe they are good recyclers. But only 25% of people separate waste correctly and up to 35% of recycling goes to landfill unnecessarily. And one in four Australians tends not to rinse or empty food containers before sending them to the bin.
So just how well does recycling need to be rinsed? What should you do with your plastic lids and pizza boxes? And will robots one day work it all out for us?
One in four Australians tends not to rinse or empty food containers before recycling them.ThamKC/Shutterstock
The problem of contamination
Mechanical recycling methods – such as shredding and melting – struggle to operate when food and other residues are present.
In fact, one spoiled item might ruin the entire cycling batch. Queensland’s Goondiwindi Regional Council, for example, said nearly a quarter of its kerbside recyclables collected in 2022–23 was contaminated and sent to landfill.
Some councils use “advanced materials recovery” that can tolerate lightly soiled recyclables. These facilities use mechanical and automated sorting processes, including optical sorters and artificial intelligence.
But other councils still rely on human sorting, or basic mechanical systems, which require items to be relatively clean.
While local recycling capabilities come into play, as a general rule, rinse containers when you can. As well as avoiding contamination, it helps reduce smells and keep bins clean.
The best pre-cleaning method for recycling depends on the type of packaging.
Paper and cardboard: these items must be clean and dry – no exceptions. Paper and cardboard absorbs contamination more than other materials. So if it gets wet or greasy, it can’t be recycled – though it may be compostable.
So for pizza boxes, for example, recycle the clean parts and bin the parts that are greasy or have food stuck to them.
Unfortunately, traditional cardboard coffee cups are not usually recyclable in Australia. That’s because the plastic lining inside is bonded tightly to the paper, making it difficult to separate during standard paper recycling.
However in some areas, programs such as Simply Cups collect coffee cups and recycle them into sustainable products such as asphalt, concrete and building products.
And in some states, such as South Australia and Western Australia, single-use cups lined with polymer are banned and only compostable cups can be used.
The plastic lining in disposable coffee cups is tightly bonded to the paper, making recycling difficult.maxbelchenko/Shutterstock
Glass and metals: these items are washed and processed at extremely high temperatures, so can tolerate a bit of residue. But too much residue can contaminate paper and cardboard in the bin. So rinse glass and plastic to remove visible food and empty liquids. Just a quick rinse is enough – there’s no need to scrub or use hot water.
But not all glass and metals can be recycled. Mirrors and light bulbs, for instance, are treated in such a way that they melt at different temperatures to other glass. So check before you chuck.
Plastics: rinse plastics before putting them in the recycling bin. It’s important to know that the numbers 1 to 7 on plastics, inside a recycling symbol, do not necessarily mean the item can be recycled in your area. The number is a code that identifies what plastic the item is made from. Check if your council can recycle that type of plastic.
Complicating matters further is the question of plastic lids. On this, guidelines differ across Australia, so check your local rules.
Likewise, the rules on plastic bottle lids differ. Some councils allow bottle-lid recycling, but even then, the processes vary. In the Australian Capital territory, for example, a lid larger than a credit card can be put in the recycling bin, but consumers are asked to remove the lid from the bottle. But Brisbane City Council asks consumers to leave the lids on.
Meanwhile, organisations such as Lids4Kids collect plastic lids and make them into new products.
Advanced chemical recycling breaks plastic down into its chemical building blocks. It can process plastic types that traditional methods can’t, such as soft plastics, and turn it into valuable new products.
AI and automation are also reshaping recycling, by improving sorting and reducing contamination. And closed-loop washing systems, which filter and reuse water, can clean lightly soiled recyclables.
Other innovations are emerging, too, such as dissolvable packaging and AI-enabled “smart bins” that might one day identify and sort materials – and maybe even tell consumers if items need rinsing!
But upcycling still requires clean, well-sorted streams to be viable. And until all these technologies are widespread, each of us must help keep our recycling systems working well.
Pooria Pasbakhsh is also affiliated with Monash University Malaysia as an Adjunct Associate Professor. He received funding from CRC-P project entitled "Upcycling of Convoluted Subsea Flexible Flow Lines", Grant number: 108439.
The chief scientist of the Botanic Gardens of Sydney is warning of an imminent and deadly risk to the city’s trees posed by an invasive beetle that has led to the removal of thousands of trees in Perth.
The tiny polyphagous shot-hole borer, which is native to south-east Asia, is a “fungus farmer” that burrows into trees and can spread a fungus that kills the host tree.
Small numbers of dead fish started washing up a fortnight ago, but it has since escalated with thousands now covering the banks of Lake Cargelligo, about 200 kilometres west of Parkes.
Research in Chile suggests climate crisis makes eruptions more likely and explosive, and warns of Antarctica risk
The melting of glaciers and ice caps by the climate crisis could unleash a barrage of explosive volcanic eruptions, a study suggests.
The loss of ice releases the pressure on underground magma chambers and makes eruptions more likely. This process has been seen in Iceland, an unusual island that sits on a mid-ocean tectonic plate boundary. But the research in Chile is one of the first studies to show a surge in volcanism on a continent in the past, after the last ice age ended.
As Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen tours the Pacific this week to spruik his government’s commitment to climate action, fossil fuel exporters such as Australia are under unprecedented scrutiny.
In a landmark ruling on Friday, Latin America’s highest human rights court found countries in that region are legally obliged to protect people from climate harms. The obligation includes tougher government regulations for fossil fuel extraction.
The finding applies to nations in the Organization of American States. But it adds to a growing number of international rulings clarifying nations’ legal obligations to tackle the climate crisis – especially if they export fossil fuels.
Australia is a major fossil-fuel exporter. When coal and gas mined in Australia is burned overseas, emissions are three times those of our entire domestic economy.
Since 2000, Australia has approved more than 700 oil, gas and coal projects. This includes federal approval in May for Woodside’s North West Shelf project – a huge expansion of gas production off Western Australia.
Emissions from these projects damage Earth’s climate, increasing the risk of harm to people around the world.
As climate change worsens, the United Nations and others are calling on countries to phase out fossil fuel production. A string of litigation involving human rights and the environment is adding to the pressure.
In a ruling handed down late last week, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights said people have the right to a stable climate and that states should regulate fossil fuel extraction and exploration.
take effective measures to combat climate change and related human rights impacts, to conduct appropriate due diligence, to adopt transition plans, and to provide accurate information regarding the impacts of their operations on climate change and human rights.
The ruling was an “advisory opinion”, and not legally binding. But it establishes the law on human rights obligations for the nations involved, and interpretations of international law for other nations.
Pictured: judges from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.JOHAN ORDONEZ/AFP via Getty Images
The campaign for the case was launched in 2019 by a group of law students at the University of the South Pacific.
This ruling will apply directly to Australia. Judges in the case are likely to take into account the findings of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights – and Australian policymakers will be watching closely.
International law is catching up with the science
Key instruments of international law, such as the UN Human Rights Conventions, were developed in the decades before a scientific consensus on global warming.
But the science has moved on. And it’s now clear that nations have legal obligations to prevent human rights harms arising from climate change.
In May this year, UN Special Rapporteur on Climate Change and Human Rights, Elisa Morgera, called on nations to end new fossil fuel projects and begin phasing out of fossil fuel production this decade, to protect human rights.
Australia hasargued only the Paris Agreement – which requires countries to set targets to cut domestic emissions – should apply when it comes to mitigating climate change. It has also argued protecting human rights does not extend to obligations to tackle climate change by cutting emissions.
Such arguments have now been rejected by international courts and tribunals. Continuing to approve new fossil fuel projects, with no plan to phase out fossil fuel production, puts Australia in violation of international legal obligations.
Australia’s obligations are also being considered in domestic cases. For instance, the Federal Court is next week due to hand down a decision on the government’s obligations to cut emissions to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate impacts. If successful, the case may force the federal government to rapidly reduce emissions.
The law is not on Australia’s side
On his trip to the Pacific this week, Chris Bowen will emphasise Australia’s commitment to tackling climate change, and progress discussions on the joint Australia–Pacific bid to host the global COP31 climate talks next year. He told the media:
Australia and the Pacific’s joint bid for COP31 is about ensuring that the region’s voice shapes global climate action for the benefit of the Australian and Pacific people.
I look forward to deepening our cooperation with Pacific neighbours; not only to build a fairer, cleaner energy future, but to bring COP31 home for our region in 2026.
People in the Pacific now know international law is on their side. Ultimately, a managed shift away from fossil fuels is inevitable – and the time for Australian policymakers to ignore the industry’s climate harms is ending.
Wesley Morgan is a fellow with the Climate Council of Australia.
Gillian Moon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Exclusive: Experts call for stricter regulation as current rules set in 1989 require testing for only a few heavy metals
Millions of tonnes of treated sewage sludge is spread on farmland across the UK every year despite containing forever chemicals, microplastics and toxic waste, and experts say the outdated current regulations are not fit for purpose.
An investigation by the Guardian and Watershed has identified England’s sludge-spreading hotspots and shown where the practice could be damaging rivers.
Harrowing stories are emerging in the wake of catastrophic and sudden flooding over the fourth of July weekend in Texas – where many people were camping, and children were at riverside summer camp.
More than 80 people are confirmed dead (28 of whom were children) and 12 people are still missing. Parents have described finding children’s bodies while picking through flood debris searching for their own missing kids.
Sudden floods can also happen in Australia, as seen recently in New South Wales around Taree and Lismore, in the wake of ex-Cyclone Alfred.
As climate change makes severe weather events more frequent, it’s worth asking: how ready is Australia for its next sudden flood? And what could help to encourage people to leave while there’s still time?
It’s hard to appreciate how suddenly floods happen
Decades of research shows disasters can emerge and change very quickly. Hazards at night are especially difficult, because much can change while people are sleeping.
Even when flood warnings are issued, authorities can struggle to convince people the problem will affect them.
People often base their risk assessments on what’s happened in the past. So, if they live in an area that has experienced minor flooding before, they may think the current flood will be similarly minor.
Research also shows people often wait for extra evidence to confirm the initial warnings from officials. They might look to see if people around them are preparing to leave, or look for cues from the environment such as a sudden burst of loud rain.
Unfortunately, waiting can mean you miss the opportunity to leave. A road may close, or services may be overwhelmed and evacuation may no longer be an option. Escape options can narrow incredibly quickly, especially when people are asleep.
What about early warning systems?
The Albanese government announced in 2023 it would spend A$236 million over a decade to establish a national flood warning network. This will involve buying and upgrading flood gauges across Australia and trying to repair what the government has called “patchwork flood gauge network”.
That’s important, and it’s also positive to see other research on ways we can use existing technology infrastructure such as mobile phone towers to get early warnings on rising floodwaters.
But technology is only one part of the bigger picture. As growing body of research shows, many people do not evacuate even when warned about floods or fire.
Communicating risk in a disaster
Authorities must find ways to communicate disaster risk in a way that people will respond to.
Research shows getting the message out through as many channels as possible is crucial. People need to hear about the warnings on TV and on radio and online through various platforms and via local groups as well as national authorities.
The evidence also suggests people are more likely to trust messages coming from others in their community.
So, emergency agencies should work through community “champions” to help spread the word about an impending flood threat. It could be the principal of a school, a trusted source in a non-English speaking community, local emergency services volunteers or the manager of a local neighbourhood centre.
Emergency and government agencies need to identify trusted sources in communities, and build connections with them, before the crisis arrives to ensure information is disseminated smoothly in an emergency.
Tailoring information is key
Many people hear warnings and believe a flood is coming, but may think the worst impacts won’t happen in their area. This is a very common misconception.
That’s why information should be tailored so people understand the risk at their particular location.
Helping people understand the consequences of not evacuating is also vital. This might mean messaging such as “if you don’t leave now, the floods will be over your roof and we may not be able to come and rescue you or your children or pet”.
Residents may not understand how fast floodwaters can move, that conditions may be very choppy and windy, or that large and dangerous debris will be coming at them and their children in a flood. This should also be communicated clearly.
Education prior to the crisis event can help people understand what flood waters can do at their location. This community awareness should be conducted in flood-prone areas at regular intervals.
Localised, tailored information can help people understand what will happen to them and their families if they don’t leave early enough – hopefully preventing devastating death tolls of the kind Texas is now grappling with.
Erica Kuligowski has received funding from the Australian Research Council and from Natural Hazards Research Australia.
A burst sewer main causes sewage to overflow into Perth’s Swan River for the second time in the past month, prompting health warnings to avoid a 7-kilometre stretch of water.
Young people living in the most deprived stretches of England’s coastline are three times more likely to be living with an undiagnosed mental health condition than their peers inland, according to new research.
This “coastal mental health gap” means that young people in these towns, which include areas of Tendring on the east coast and Blackpool and Liverpool to the west, are suffering disproportionately, often alone and with no help, said the researchers who conducted the study.
Deep-sea mining promises critical minerals for the energy transition without the problems of mining on land. It also promises to bring wealth to developing nations. But the evidence suggests these promises are false, and mining would harm the environment.
The practice involves scooping up rock-like nodules from vast areas of the sea floor. These potato-sized lumps contain metals and minerals such as zinc, manganese, molybdenum, nickel and rare earth elements.
Technology to mine the deep sea exists, but commercial mining of the deep sea is not happening anywhere in the world. That could soon change. Nations are meeting this month in Kingston, Jamaica, to agree to a mining code. Such a code would make way for mining to begin within the next few years.
On Thursday, Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO, released research into the environmental impacts of deep-sea mining. It aims to promote better environmental management of deep-sea mining, should it proceed.
We have previously challenged the rationale for deep-sea mining, drawing on our expertise in international politics and environmental management. We argue mining the deep sea is harmful and the economic benefits have been overstated. What’s more, the metals and minerals to be mined are not scarce.
The best course of action is a ban on international seabed mining, building on the coalition for a moratorium.
The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.
Managing and monitoring environmental harm
Recent advances in technology have made deep-sea mining more feasible. But removing the nodules – which also requires pumping water around – has been shown to damage the seabed and endanger marine life.
CSIRO has developed the first environmental management and monitoring frameworks to protect deep sea ecosystems from mining. It aims to provide “trusted, science-based tools to evaluate the environmental risks and viability of deep-sea mining”.
Scientists from Griffith University, Museums Victoria, the University of the Sunshine Coast, and Earth Sciences New Zealand were also involved in the work.
The Metals Company Australia, a local subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining exploration company, commissioned the research. It involved analysing data from test mining the company carried out in the Pacific Ocean in 2022.
In a media briefing this week, CSIRO Senior Principal Research Scientist Piers Dunstan said the mining activity substantially affected the sea floor. Some marine life, especially that attached to the nodules, had very little hope of recovery. He said if mining were to go ahead, monitoring would be crucial.
We are sceptical that ecological impacts can be managed even with this new framework. Little is known about life in these deep-water ecosystems. But research shows nodule mining would cause extensive habitat loss and damage.
Do we really need to open the ocean frontier to mining? We argue the answer is no, on three counts.
How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)
1. Minerals are not scarce
The minerals required for the energy transition are abundant on land. Known global terrestrial reserves of cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum and nickel are enough to meet current production levels for decades – even with growing demand.
There is no compelling reason to extract deep-sea minerals, given the economics of both deep-sea and land-based mining. Deep-sea mining is speculative and inevitably too expensive given such remote, deep operations.
Claims about mineral scarcity are being used to justify attempting to legitimise a new extractive frontier in the deep sea. Opportunistic investors can make money through speculation and attracting government subsidies.
But deep-sea mining will not necessarily displace, replace or change mining on land. Land-based mining contracts span decades and the companies involved will not abandon ongoing or planned projects. Their activities will continue, even if deep-sea mining begins.
Deep-sea mining also faces many of the same challenges as mining on land, while introducing new problems. The social problems that arise during transport, processing and distribution remain the same.
3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the international seabed is the common heritage of humankind. This means the proceeds of deep-sea mining should be distributed fairly among all countries.
Deep-sea mining commercial partnerships between developing countries in the Global South and firms from the North have yet to pay off for the former. There is little indication this pattern will change.
For example, when Canadian company Nautilus went bankrupt in 2019, it saddled Papua New Guinea with millions in debt from a failed domestic deep-sea mining venture.
The Metals Company has partnerships with Nauru and Tonga but the latest deal with the US creates uncertainty about whether their agreements will be honoured.
European investors took control of Blue Minerals Jamaica, originally a Jamaican-owned company, shortly after orchestrating its start up. Any profits would therefore go offshore.
Given the threat of environmental harm, the evidence suggests deep-sea mining is not worth the risk.
Justin Alger receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
D.G. Webster receives funding from the National Science Foundation in the United States and various internal funding sources at Dartmouth University.
Jessica Green receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Kate J Neville receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Stacy D VanDeveer and Susan M Park 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.
Exclusive: Letter to government says lower prices for repaired goods would cut waste, create jobs and help households save money
Ministers are facing fresh calls to scrap VAT on all repaired and refurbished electronics, with businesses, charities and community groups arguing the move would help households cut costs and stop electrical goods being binned prematurely.
In a letter to the environment secretary, Steve Reed, the signatories say that removing VAT on repaired electronics should be part of a wider push to cut waste, extend the life of products and develop a “truly circular economy”.
Pet owners would be legally required to spend a minimum of three hours with their dog every day under the proposed laws, but questions remain about how such laws would be enforced.
With the imminent release of a review into the risks of rodent bait in Australia, an award-winning initiative uses barn owls as a natural alternative to controlling rats and mice on farms.
Activating real civic resilience could be a KPI for the prime minister’s progressive patriotism, rather than spending billions more on big, shiny machines
Australians have long taken some comfort in the protection afforded by geography and the tyranny of distance. It was an article of faith that Australia would have 10 years warning to prepare for any conflict, and that the nation the defence minister calls our capital-A ally would spring to our defence.
The 10-year buffer was debunked in the 2020 defence review, and the update two years later concluded that the Australian Defence Force “as currently constituted and equipped is not fully fit for purpose”.
