Fossil fuel companies ‘poisoned the well’ of public debate with climate disinformation. Here’s how Australia can break free

by bpckle | Apr 22, 2025 | Media

President Donald Trump has issued an executive order that would block state laws seeking to tackle greenhouse gas emissions – the latest salvo in his administration’s campaign to roll back United States’ climate action.

Under Trump, the US has clearly abdicated climate leadership. But the US has in fact obstructed climate action for decades – largely due to damaging actions by the powerful fossil fuel industry.

In 20 years studying attacks on climate science and the powerful forces at work behind the scenes, I’ve come to think the United States is simply not going to lead on climate action. The fossil fuel industry has so poisoned the well of public debate in the US that it’s unlikely the nation will lead on the issue in our lifetimes.

Australia, on the other hand, has enormous potential.

I recently visited Australia from Harvard University for a series of public talks. This nation is very close to my heart. I trained as a mining geologist and spent three years in outback South Australia, before returning to academia.

The vacuum Trump has created on climate policy provides a chance for other countries to lead. Australia has much more to gain from the clean-energy future than it stands to lose – and your climate action could be pivotal.

The climate crisis: a long time coming

Scientists first warned against burning fossil fuels way back in the 1950s. When the US Clean Air Act was passed in 1970, the words “weather” and “climate” were included because scientists had already explained to Congress that carbon dioxide was a pollutant with serious — even dire — effects.

In the late 1980s, scientists at NASA observed changes in the climate system that could only be explained by the extra heating effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The predictions had become reality.

When George H.W. Bush ran successfully for president in 1988, he promised to use the power of the “White House effect” to fight the “greenhouse effect”. In 1992, Bush and other world leaders gathered in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to sign the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Together, 178 countries promised action to prevent “dangerous anthropogenic interference” with Earth’s climate. But that action never came.

Trump has undoubtedly been bad news for global climate action. He makes preposterous claims about science and is dismantling the federal agencies responsible for supporting climate science and maintaining climate data.

But the US has long failed to play its part in cutting dangerous greenhouse gas emissions. The reason for this lies largely outside the White House.

A long-running campaign of disinformation

The fossil fuel industry has known about climate change for as long as scientists have.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, scientists at Esso (later ExxonMobil) actively researched the topic, building climate models and coauthoring scientific papers.

The scientists informed their managers of the risk of catastrophic damage if the burning of oil, gas and coal continued unabated. They even suggested the company might need a different business model – one not so dependent on fossil fuels.

But managers at ExxonMobil made a fateful decision: to turn from information to disinformation. Working in tandem with other oil, gas and coal companies, as well as automobile and aluminium manufacturers, ExxonMobil launched an organised campaign, sustained over decades, to block climate action by casting doubt on the underlying science.

They ran ad campaigns in national and local newspapers insisting the science was too unsettled to warrant action. They created “astroturf” organisations that only pretended to be green, and funded “third-party allies” to argue that proposed remedies would be too expensive, cost jobs and damage the economy.

The company funded outlier scientists to publish papers claiming atmospheric warming was the result of natural climate variability. They pressured journalists to give equal time to “their side” of the story in the name of “balance”.

Over the next three decades, whenever any meaningful climate policy seemed to be gaining traction, the industry and its allies lobbied Congress and state legislatures to block it. So, neither Democratic nor Republican administrations were able to undertake meaningful climate action.

While people were dying in climate-charged floods and fires, the fossil fuel industry persuaded a significant proportion of the US population, including Trump, that the whole thing might just be a hoax.

Rise up Australia

In a matter of weeks after becoming president, Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming, shut down government websites hosting climate data, and withdrew support for research that dares to mention the word “climate”.

This has created a vacuum that other countries, including Australia, can step up to fill.

Few countries have more to lose from climate change than Australia. The continent has already witnessed costly and devastating wildfires and floods — affecting remote areas and major cities. It’s not unreasonable to worry that in coming years, significant parts of Australia could become uninhabitable.

Like the US, Australia has a powerful fossil fuel industry that has disproportionately influenced its politics. Unlike the US, however, that industry is based mainly on coal for export, which Australians do not depend on in their daily lives.

And Australia is truly a lucky country. It has unsurpassed potential to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy.

More than 15 years ago, Australian researchers in the Zero Carbon Australia project offered a blueprint for how the country could eliminate fossil fuel use entirely. Since then, renewable energy has only become cheaper and more efficient.

South Australia has proved the point: the state was 100% reliant on fossil fuels for electricity in 2002, but now more than 70% comes from renewables.

Across Australia, the share of renewable electricity generation is growing. Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland are vying for second place after SA. It’s fascinating to watch the National Electricity Market balance supply and demand in real time, where a large proportion of the electricity comes from rooftop solar.

For decades, the fossil fuel industry has told the public our societies can’t manage without fossil fuels. Large parts of Australia have proved it’s just not so. The rest of the nation can follow that lead, and model the energy transition for the world. Here’s your chance.

Over the past two decades, Naomi Oreskes has received grant funding from various governments and non-government organisations to support the research upon which this piece is based. She serves on the board of The Climate Science Legal Defense Fund, which works to protect the integrity of climate science, and climate scientists, from politically motivated attacks. The Fund is a registered 501 c(3) non-profit organisation, meaning it does not engage in political activities. She is also an emerita board member of Protect our Winters, a 501 c (3) that works with the winter sports community to educate people about climate change and the threat it poses to winter sports. Naomi serves on the board of the Kann-Rasmussen foundation (Denmark), a non-profit foundation that works “to support the transition to a more environmentally resilient stable, and sustainable planet”.
Naomi currently serves as a consultant to a number of groups pursuing climate litigation in the United States, and recently submitted an expert report to the International Court of Justice on behalf of Vanuatu. She also receives speaking fees and book royalties for talks and publications on the history of climate science and climate change denial. Co-author, with Erik M. Conway, of Merchants of Doubt (2010) and The Big Myth (2023).

‘Puppy blues’: how to cope with the exhaustion and stress of raising a puppy

by bpckle | Apr 21, 2025 | Media

Caring for a new puppy can be wonderful, but it can also bring feelings of depression, extreme stress and exhaustion. This is sometimes referred to as “the puppy blues”, and can begin anytime after the puppy arrives in the household.

While researchers are still working on a way to officially diagnose puppy blues, symptoms generally include:

• physical exhaustion, due to all the feeding, training, cleaning, walks, management and sleep disruptions
• emotional exhaustion
• feeling depressed or guilty for not “doing enough” for the puppy
• self-imposed perfectionist stress and feeling pressure to raise a puppy “the right way”
• feelings of regret and doubt
• constantly wondering if the puppy would be better off with someone else or being returned.

The good news is these feelings are generally temporary. Puppies have a number of difficult developmental states that need to be managed (each with their own unique challenges) – but these will pass as your puppy grows and settles in.

The bad news? It can be really tough, and can last weeks or months.

There is very little research into the puppy blues. But through interviews, surveys and longitudinal studies (where scholars track people’s experiences over time), researchers have begun piecing together what can help puppy owners survive these challenges.

Get the help you need

Much like rearing children, puppy raising is hardest as a solo journey. Researchers highly recommend building a team around you and your puppy to help decrease the stress.

Seek help from parents, friends and family. Having people who you can call to puppysit and to lean on emotionally during tough times is a lifesaver for puppy owners.

Having a great local vet you trust is crucial (bonus points if you also get yourself a vet with further qualifications in animal behaviour). Chat to your vet if you are worried about your puppy’s behaviour or want to know more about force-free training.

Online communities have their place too. Seeing others go through (and survive!) similar challenges can be a great relief. These communities can also be a treasure trove of advice.

That said, remember there’s almost just as much bad advice as good online. Check with your vet if you’re unsure. The use of aversive training methods, such as smacking or yelling, is associated with more behavioural problems by the time your puppy is a year old.

And if you find yourself feeling really overwhelmed, don’t be afraid to chat to your GP about your mental health.

Make sure you have the right resources

Puppy care is full-time work. Working two full-time jobs leads to burnout. If possible, take time off work to help settle your new pet in. If your can’t, call on your village for help with puppysitting.

Consider how you can make use of long-lasting toys and safe spaces to keep your puppy entertained for a while without your input.

Long lasting chew toys, “snuffle mats” (which can be easily and cheaply made at home and can be used to hide food), and puzzle toys can also help your puppy learn to relax and settle on their own.

Play pens are also a godsend and allow you to step away or rest while they nap, eat or play.

Keep realistic expectations

There is no such thing as “perfect” when it comes to raising a puppy; chasing perfection will only lead to misery.

It can help to remember that puppies are babies. They are not supposed to know the cue to sit or stay yet, or to be able to focus on you for long during a training session.

When their teeth hurt, they’re going to grab the nearest item to chew on – which might be your hand, your shoe or your favourite sunglasses. Either way, babies are going to make mistakes, not because you’ve failed, but because their brains are too underdeveloped to do any better right now.

Training sometimes goes backwards – or out the window altogether. This is especially true when we hit new developmental periods. It’s normal and you’ve done nothing wrong (remember those underdeveloped brains!). If you’re concerned, seek professional advice from a vet.

Remember, none of the challenges will last forever. Try to enjoy the good moments, because they won’t last forever either.

Is kitten blues a thing?

While kitten blues has not been researched as much as puppy blues, many kitten owners in online forums anecdotally report similar feelings of overwhelm and exhaustion.

So it’s reasonable to assume this phenomenon exists and is likely very similar to its puppy counterpart. The advice in this article applies to both kittens and puppy owners.

Puppies and kittens are certainly not easy to raise.

But when you’re staring into those adorable eyes, wondering how this tiny creature who brings you so much love can also make you cry with exhaustion, remember: you’ve got this.

Susan Hazel has received funding from the Waltham Foundation. She is affiliated with the Dog and Cat Management Board of South Australia and the RSPCA South Australia.

Ana Goncalves Costa is affiliated with the Delta Institute and South Australian veterinary behaviour clinic Pawly Understood.

Why healthy eating may be the best way to reduce food waste

by bpckle | Apr 17, 2025 | Media

Australians waste around 7.68 million tonnes of food a year. This costs the economy an estimated A$36.6 billion and households up to $2,500 annually.

Much of this food is wasted at home. So while consumers are increasingly aware of sustainability issues, awareness does not always translate into better food management in practice.

Our previous research revealed people differ in the ways they generate and dispose of food waste.

Our latest study takes a closer look at two groups who care deeply about food, for different reasons. It exposes a paradox: people who prioritise healthy eating waste less food, while those focused on sustainability do not necessarily follow through with waste reduction.

This suggests encouraging healthier eating habits might be a better way to cut household food waste than sustainability messaging alone.

Sustainability awareness doesn’t always mean less waste

To understand how food values influence waste, we surveyed 1,030 Australian consumers living in Adelaide between April and May 2021. We set quotas for age, sex and household income to match national demographics.

We wanted to find out who wasted more food: nutrition-conscious or sustainability-conscious consumers?

We asked each person how they plan meals and shop, what they value when buying food, and how much food they throw away each week.

Our results show nutrition-conscious consumers tend to plan meals in advance, use shopping lists and avoid over-purchasing. These behaviours contribute to both a healthier diet and less food waste.

We found consumers who make more nutrition-conscious food choices tended to waste less edible food. A one-point increase on our nutrition scale corresponded to a 17.6% reduction in food waste, compared to people with lower scores on the nutrition scale.

On the other hand, those who prioritise sustainability over nutrition did not show any significant reduction in edible food waste.

These consumers tend to choose environmentally friendly products. They typically prefer to shop locally, buy organic produce and avoid excessive food packaging. But that does not necessarily translate into waste-reducing behaviours.

Those concerned with sustainability tend to buy more food than they need. They have good intentions, but lack strategies to manage and consume the food efficiently. Unfortunately this means sustainably sourced food often ends up in landfill.

Integrating nutrition and food waste messaging

Our research reveals a disconnect between purchasing choices and what actually happens to the food at home.

This highlights an opportunity for policymakers and campaigns aimed at reducing food waste. Rather than focusing solely on sustainability, including messages about improving nutrition can boost health and reduce food waste at the same time.

Some successful interventions already demonstrate the potential of this approach. For example, an Australian school-based program found children involved in preparing their own meals wasted less food than they did before the program began.

These students learned about food waste and healthy eating, participated in workshops on meal preparation and composting, and helped pack their own lunches – with less food waste as a result.

5 ways to reduce food waste

So, what can households do to reduce food waste while maintaining a healthy diet? Our research suggests the following key strategies:

1. plan ahead – creating a weekly meal plan and shopping list helps prevent impulse purchases and ensures food is consumed before it spoils

2. buy only what you need – over-purchasing, even of sustainable products, can lead to unnecessary waste

3. store food properly – understanding how to store fresh produce, dairy, and leftovers can significantly extend their shelf life

4. prioritise nutrition – choosing foods that fit into a balanced diet naturally leads to better portion control and mindful consumption, reducing waste

5. use what you have – before shopping, check your fridge and pantry to incorporate existing ingredients into meals.

Reducing waste is a bonus

People are often more motivated by personal health benefits than abstract environmental concerns. Our research suggests this is the key to reducing household food waste.

Encouraging meal planning for a balanced diet, careful shopping to avoid over-purchasing, and proper food storage, can make a big difference to the amount of food being wasted. This will not only help households save thousands of dollars each year, but also promote healthy eating habits.

Ultimately, developing a more sustainable food system is not just about buying the right products. It’s about how we manage, prepare and consume them.

Trang Nguyen receives funding from the End Food Waste Cooperative Research Centre and the Australian Government.

Jack Hetherington receives funding from the End Food Waste Cooperative Research Centre and the Australian Government and is a member of the Landcare Association of South Australia volunteer Management Committee.

Patrick O'Connor receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Agrifutures and the Commonwealth and State Governments

‘They are like my children’: research reveals 4 types of indoor plant owners. Which one are you?

by bpckle | Apr 17, 2025 | Media

Walk into any home or workplace today, and you’re likely to find an array of indoor plants. The global market for indoor plants is growing fast – projected to reach more than US$28 billion (A$44 billion) by 2031.

People keep indoor plants inside for a variety of reasons, including as decoration, to clean the air and for stress relief. But my colleagues and I wanted to delve further. What sort of relationships do people have with indoor plants? And what can this tell us about ties between humans and nature?

We surveyed indoor plant owners in Australia, and found many of us form highly meaningful connections with our leafy companions. Some people even consider their plants as family, get anxious about their health and mourn a plant when it dies.

A blooming hobby

People have grown plants inside for thousands of years.

Evidence suggests Egyptians brought plants indoors in the 3rd century BC. The remains of the former city of Pompeii reveal indoor plants used there more than 2,000 years ago, and in medieval England, indoor plants were used in medicine and cooking.

The keeping of indoor plants became widespread across the world in the second half of the 20th century. The practice was particularly popular during the COVID-19 pandemic, likely due to a desire to connect with nature when access to outdoor green spaces was limited.

The benefits of indoor plants go beyond nature connection. Studies show they can increase positive emotions, reduce stress, enhance productivity, and even decrease physical discomfort such as pain.

However, people have varying levels of connection to their plants, as research by my colleagues and I shows.

Why we love indoor plants

We surveyed 115 Australian adults, recruited through social media posts and poster advertisements at the University of South Australia. Participants were roughly 69% female, 30% male and 1% non-binary, and ranged in age from 18 to 69.

On average, participants owned 15 indoor plants. Some owned a single indoor plant and one person owned a whopping 500!

Between them, respondents kept 51 different varieties of house plants. The most common were succulents, devil’s ivy and monstera. They most commonly kept the plants in the living room, kitchen or bedroom.

Across all participants, 11 benefits of having indoor plants were reported.

Half the respondents described the aesthetic appeal of indoor plants. Comments included that indoor plants were “nice to look at”, “soften rooms” and “add colour”. Participants also reported air quality benefits, and that they found indoor plants calming.

Other less commonly reported benefits were that the plants helped the respondents set habits, improved their physical health, provided distraction, relieved fatigue and had a pleasant smell.

4 types of relationships with indoor plants

Our research identified four types of relationships people have with their indoor plants:

1. Highly connected (14% of respondents)

These people typically described a deep personal connection to their plants. Comments included:

They are like my children. (male, 28)

I often water them and take care of them as family members. (female, 26)

Well I cried over my plants leaf getting broken off today, so you could say I’m pretty attached
to her. (female, 21)

I feel terrible if one dies, I feel as though I have let it down and generally bury it in the garden. (female, 34)

2. Engaged (42% of respondents)

These people enjoyed and tended to their plants, but without deep emotional attachment. For example:

Watering them and watching them grow is exciting, I feel proud to keep them alive so long (female, 22)

I get sad when one dies or is looking droopy, I feel happy when they look alive and freshly
watered. (female, 22)

3. Limited engagement (23%)

These respondents enjoyed having indoor plants but spent minimal time caring for them and reported minimal emotional connections to them. One participant said:

Feel like indoor plants are fine but through our large windows we can see our outdoor plants and that’s more important to us. (female, 45)

4. No relationship (12%)

Participants who did not have a relationship with their indoor plants said:

Hardly watered it as it’s a succulent. (male, 21)

They are all gifts rather than something I’ve gone out to buy. (male, 21)

(For the remaining 9% of participants, their responses to the question of their relationship with house plants were invalid and not included.)

Unlocking the potential of indoor plants

Our research suggests indoor plants can enrich our lives in ways we are only beginning to understand.

It’s important to note that data for our study were collected in 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic. This context may have influenced our results. For example, some participants may have felt particularly connected to their indoor plants because their access to outdoor green space was curtailed. So, further research is needed in the post-pandemic context.

Human–nature relationships are an emerging field of research. By understanding the relationship between people and plants, we may help unlock the potential for nature to improve our health and wellbeing.

Brianna Le Busque 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.