Rubbish floating in the mangroves on the Brisbane River

Earlier this week, I found myself wandering along the banks of the Brisbane River. It was a pleasantly warm spring day and there were families out enjoying everything that South Bank has to offer - the pools, the grassy picnic areas and the cycle ways that run through the whole area. There’s no doubt in my mind that the development of South Bank has been a positive contribution to the health and wellbeing of our community. It was great to see so many people getting out and being healthy and active.

It’s a different story on the other side of the river.The Goodwill Bridge links the most eastern edge of South Bank to QUT Gardens Point campus and is for pedestrian and cyclist access only. The majority of people would probably follow the signs towards the city, the Botanic Gardens nearby or the university campus itself. I wonder how many choose to walk along the river itself, unless they needed to catch the ferry at Gardens Point.

The access to the ferry landing is a complete contrast to the one on the opposite side of the river. It is a narrow walkway, shared by pedestrians and cyclists which takes people underneath the Riverside Expressway. It is dark and dingy, although blessedly cool in the heat of the day. The smell hits you as soon as you round the corner. Mangroves smell at the best of times but I was unprepared for the stench of rotting food and dairy products left behind by people too careless to make sure their trash goes in the bin. Lolly packets, leftover MacDonalds meals, water bottles and old milk containers have all made their way into the mangroves. Having almost been hit by a flying Coke can thrown out of a passing motorist’s window from the above Expressway, I get the distinct impression that it is not an unusual event.

Despite ongoing education of the public about improving the health of our waterways, it seems it is falling on deaf ears. For the past two years (based on 2007 results), the Lower Brisbane water catchment has consistently scored the lowest rating available in terms of river health. This is despite some clear improvements in other regions of the state. I am sure the answer lies within education and increasing awareness of how improvements in the quality of our waterways can in turn impact positively upon human health.

Please do the right thing by our waterways and the environment in general. Throw your rubbish in the bin and if you’re travelling, keep a plastic bag in the car for your waste and dispose of it properly at your destination. Encourage your friends and family to do the same. It is the small things we can do which can contribute to changing attitudes and behaviours, therefore improving the quality of our environment and subsequently our lives as well.

2007 Results of the Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program

• Summary Report Card
• Southern Region Report Card
• Moreton Region Report Card
  

September 30th, 2008 | Category: Pollution |  Print This Post |  Email This Post | Leave a comment

The most cost effective way of having a sustainable home is implementing green alternatives during the building process itself. If you’re looking at building a house in the not too distant future, it is worthwhile taking a look at the different levels of rebates available for environmentally friendly alternatives to energy production, cooling, heating and the housing design itself.

There are rebates available for a range of environmentally friendly housing design products but the amount can vary from state to state and are dependent on the applicant meeting eligibility criteria. As part of the Solar Homes and Communities Plan, the federal government is offering a rebate on solar photovoltaic systems to a maximum of $8000 for a residential installation. Similarly a $1000 rebate is available for solar hot water systems, with the option of buying back of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). A full list of various rebates and grants for water and energy use is available from the Alternative Technology Association website.

So that’s great if you’re building a home but what if you already have one that needs retrofitting to accommodate renewable technologies? What if you just can’t afford the upfront cost? In 2009, there may be a solution available to home owners in this situation. The federal government announced in May this year that there will be an Green Loans Program to assist with costs of retrofitting a home with green technology. The loan is intended to be low interest to a maximum of $10 000. As yet, the eligibility criteria has not been released but it is anticipated that this will occur late this year. If you’re interested in this prospect, you can find more information here.

September 21st, 2008 | Category: Sustainability |  Print This Post |  Email This Post | Leave a comment

Rachel Carson’s novel Silent Spring (1962) is often credited with the rise of environmentalism across the globe (1). Carson highlighted many observations of diminishing qualities of environmental resources and was openly criticised for bringing her concerns about global environmenal issues to the attention of everyday Americans. It is perhaps a little ironic that some thirty years later, some of her predictions of the consequences of unchecked industrialisation were increasingly proving to be valid.

However, it was the damming of Lake Pedder which created so much controversy in Tasmania which radically raised the profile of environmental concerns in this country (2). Hydroelectricity is a valuable renewable resource, particularly in Tasmania and despite the popularity of Lake Pedder as a tourist destination, it was flooded to form a dam and therefore help boost electricity production in the state. As quoted by the Lake Pedder Restoration Committee, Tasmania Energy minister Robin Gray (regarding the option of restoring the lake by draining the dam) stated that:

“Lake Pedder provides about 40 percent of the average flow to Tasmania’s biggest power station, the Gordon Power Station, which in turn provides about 13 percent of the State’s total power supply. The lake is a source of stored energy that Tasmania cannot afford to lose. “

Therein lies the conflict which will always be at the heart of environmentalism and is what often hinders genuine attempts at sustainable development. Environmentalists will always want to protect pristine areas, whereas the affect on society and economics must always be considered when deciding whether a development proposal should gain approval (3,4). In the past, environmental concerns have been largely ignored in favour of economic and societal development.

I do believe that we have reached a pivotal moment where sound development decisions will determine whether or not future generations will enjoy the kind of lifestyle that we do today. Sustainable development is not just about keeping “the greenies” happy. It is about protecting a valuable commodity - our environment - upon which all life depends, including us.

References:
(1) International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). 2002, The Sustainable Development Timeline 3^rd Edition
(2) Saddler, H., Bennet, J., Reynolds, I. & Smith, B. 1980, Public choice in Tasmania: aspects of the lower Gordon River hydro-electric development proposal, Australian National University, Canberra.
(3) UNCED, Annex 1: Rio Declaration on Environment and Development’, Report Of The United Nations Conference On Environment And Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992
(4) Holmberg, J., Thomson, K. & Timberlake, L. 1993, Facing the Future: Beyond the Earth Summit, Earthscan Publications Ltd, London.

September 14th, 2008 | Category: Environmentalism, Sustainability |  Print This Post |  Email This Post | Leave a comment

Sometimes I think deregulation of the energy industry was the best thing to ever happen in this country, at least from an environmental perspective. Although there has been some improvement in cleaner coal technologies for energy production resulting in lower emissions, greenhouse gas contributions from the electricity, gas and water economic sector were still the highest in the country in 2006 (1).

With deregulation of the energy industry, the consumer finally has a choice as to which energy provider they give their business. Therefore, energy companies need to make their product worthwhile to a broad variety of consumers. While there are many people who will still be motivated by price alone, consumers concerned with environmental issues such as climate change may also look at what options are available in terms of renewable energy products.

I was surprised to hear an advertisment for AGL Energy on my local radio station this morning, promoting their company as becoming more environmentally friendly and what they are doing to achieve this. They provided a website and of course, I couldn’t resist looking once I got home. It really is very interesting - an energy production plant powered by macadamia nut shells! According to their website promotion, this type of plant is a first for Australia. The energy production process is explained on AGL’s website(2):

Nut shells are burnt in a fire boiler, which creates steam

Some of the steam is used to dry the macadamia nuts

The majority of steam is used to drive a turbine to generate clean, renewable electricity

About 80% of the electricity is sent to the national power grid as GreenPower

About 20% is used in the plant’s operation

Why macadamia nut shells? Well the answer to that appears obvious after doing a little bit of digging. AGL’s macadamia plant is situated in Gympie (QLD) and conveniently located in Yandina (QLD) around 60 kilometres away is Nutworks - a macadamia nut processing facility. I’m sure you’ll agree that it is a great example of innovation and co-operation between industries to produce cleaner energy, which is good news for the environment.

Reference:
(1) National Inventory by Economic Sector 2006
(2) Energy from macadamia nut shells - AGL Energy

September 11th, 2008 | Category: Sustainability |  Print This Post |  Email This Post | Leave a comment

I suspect many people have probably heard of biodiversity mentioned in terms of conservation management. But I wonder how many people know the reason why environmentalists are concerned about protecting it in the first place. Does it really matter whether we maintain the level of biodiversity we have now?

Although there has been a loss of many species endemic to Australia since European settlement, Australia still has a high level of biodiversity. For example, as adapted from Lindenmayer (1):
Marine fish - As many as 3500 species of fish live in the coastal waters surrounding Australia
Sharks and rays - Australia is home to approximately half the shark and ray species found in the world
Terrestrial mammals - More than half of the marsupials found in the world live here and the majority of mammals found in Australia are endemic to this country.
Birds - Our species of parrots account for 1/6th of the world taxa
Reptiles - The majority of reptiles found in Australia are endemic, with our deserts providing the highest level of reptile diversity in the world.
Frogs - Almost all species found here are endemic, with more than 200 species documented.

What I’ve listed is pretty impressive but for the sake of brevity, that’s not even mentioning invertebrate diversity, fungus, algae or plants. Certainly there are other biodiversity hotspots on the planet, such as the jungles of South America or Madagascar off the eastern coast of Africa. But in terms of protecting world biodiversity, maintaining levels of biodiversity in Australia should still be a priority.

That leads me back to the original question, why do we need to protect it in the first place? Thinking purely selfishly, it is for the benefit of continued health and well being of the human population of the planet. Penicillin, a common antibiotic, was only discovered after Alexander Fleming cultured it from a fungus. Digoxin, a medication used to correct some cardiac arrhythmias, was derived from the Foxglove plant (Digitalis purpurea). Aboriginal Australians used natural remedies obtained from plants and fungus for centuries to treat simple injuries and diseases. Who is to say that the answer to modern medical problems, such as cancer and AIDS/HIV does not lie within the natural world? Many biodiverse hotspots of the world remain relatively unpenetrable due to dense vegetation, so it is not unrealistic to believe that there are many plants, animals and organisms we are yet to discover.

Even if we do not want to conserve biodiversity for its intrinsic value alone, the benefits that are yet to be available to the human populations of the world are reason enough to protect it.

Reference: (1) Lindenmayer, D. 2007, On Borrowed Time: Australia’s Environmental Crisis and what we must do about it, Penguin Books/CSIRO Publishing, Camberwell VIC.

September 10th, 2008 | Category: Biodiversity |  Print This Post |  Email This Post | Leave a comment