Sustainability Matters RSS Feed

How do we prepare for a hotter, more populated, Sydney?

Wed, 03 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +1000

There are two things that seem inevitable about Sydney’s future; the population will grow, and the city will get hotter. And both outcomes are intrinsically linked.

Recent data suggests greater Sydney’s population is projected to increase by 1.4 million people, reaching 6.3 million in 2041. This is a 13% increase in a decade, with New South Wales also becoming home to 9.4 million.

Despite the growth, Sydney will still be on the lower end of population density for major cities across the world; well below cities like London, New York, Toronto and Berlin. Regardless, density concerns prevail. As we build out homes to accommodate more people, the fear is that new subdivisions and neighbourhoods will foster a concrete jungle. This is something we have to avoid.

In parallel, we have to balance a higher population with a warmer city. Researchers from the University of British Columbia found Sydney’s summer season had increased in length by 49 days since 1990. Sydney’s rate of warming was more than double that of most other cities analysed, including Tokyo, Paris, Reykjavík and St Petersburg.

In Western Sydney, where the city’s heat islands are concentrated, particularly in new developments, unshaded concrete can reach 60°C, and asphalt can hit 75°C. Concrete has a high thermal mass, meaning it can retain heat for long periods of time and continue to radiate it well into the evening.

From heat-absorbing materials, like concrete, to fewer trees for shade and greenery, this creates a heat island effect, where cities have a higher temperature than surrounding rural areas. As we rush to build new neighbourhoods to accommodate more people quickly, we need to actively avoid creating more heat islands than we currently already have.

New subdivisions and neighbourhoods need to be designed around green spaces, prioritising community connection, accessible public spaces, and shaded outdoor areas to lessen the impact of extreme heat.

This is particularly important for new housing development projects in Sydney, such as the recently announced Bays West, which has promised to deliver 8500 well-located homes in the underutilised port facility.

What the project will look like is not yet known. But designers need to build for a Sydney of the future. Yes, that includes a higher population, but it also means a hotter city. New neighbourhoods like Bays West must put shade and liveability at the centre of the design process to create comfortable environments where people want to live and play, sheltered from the oppressive Aussie summer heat.

Luckily there are tools that take the guesswork out of city planning. You no longer need to plant trees or add shading elements and then hope they’ll offer the right amount of shade. Technology can simulate building volumes and outdoor environments and show the direct impact of shading strategies on lowering the temperature of the area.

Thermal comfort maps and heat maps can be created for a specific date and time so architects and urban planners can see how the outdoor environment will handle extreme temperatures. These maps can also show exactly when outdoor spaces like public parks and squares will be hottest/coldest, because there’s no point in spending the time and money to create outdoor spaces if they become too hot for people to enjoy.

Forma Site Design Microclimate at Circular Quay. Image: Supplied. [Click on image for a larger view.]

As Sydney enters this phase of rapid growth, there is the potential that Bays West will be the first of many similar housing developments announced in the next few months and years. And it’s welcome because, simply put, we need many, many more homes. But it’s important we take the time to build with the Australian lifestyle at the centre, by embodying community, greenery and access to the outdoors.

These days, this kind of analysis doesn’t even add extra time or hassle to the planning phase. But it does help make these new neighbourhoods a significantly more enjoyable — and cooler — place for people to call home.

Top image credit: iStock.com/Brian Bornstein

Australian industry won't hit net zero if organisations hoard their data

Tue, 02 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +1000

For most of us, checking our phones each morning is routine. Will we need sunscreen or an umbrella? The apps giving us that answer rely on a system where 193 countries standardise and share measurements from ocean buoys, balloon radiosondes and orbital satellites, all feeding into the World Weather Watch. No single country could build an accurate forecast alone. Shared, standardised data turns fragmented local readings into reliable global predictions.

Industrial operations face an almost identical challenge. Individual mines, refineries and manufacturing plants generate vast quantities of data from equipment sensors, process controls and asset trackers, but that data typically stays onsite. An energy anomaly at one site could inform optimisation at another, but nobody can see it.

This matters now more than ever for Australian industry. The reformed Safeguard Mechanism requires roughly 215 facilities emitting more than 100,000 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent per year to reduce their baselines by 4.9% annually through to 2030. In the first year of the reformed scheme, covered emissions fell by 2.7 million tonnes. But the government’s own emissions projections show the path from Australia’s 2030 target of 43% below 2005 levels to its 2035 target of 62–70% will demand faster, deeper cuts across industry.

Some of Australia’s largest operators are already demonstrating what connected data can deliver. BHP, which reported a 32% reduction in operational greenhouse gas emissions by 2024 against its 2020 baseline, connects sensor data from drilling equipment, conveyor systems and processing plants into models that predict equipment failures, reduce unplanned downtime and cut fuel use. BHP’s operational emissions dropped to 9.2 MtCO₂-e, achieved through onsite abatement rather than carbon credit purchases.

Australia’s electricity grid faces the same coordination problem at a national scale. AEMO’s draft 2026 Integrated System Plan projects that total generation and storage capacity in the National Electricity Market needs to triple from 92 GW today to 297 GW by 2050. Managing that system, where rooftop solar on 1400 homes a day joins grid-scale wind farms, utility batteries and aging coal plants across five states, is fundamentally a data-sharing problem. AEMO’s 2025 Transition Plan for System Security identifies eight transition points linked to coal plant retirements where real-time coordination between generators, storage operators and network businesses will determine whether the lights stay on. The technology to connect those assets exists. The barrier is getting separate organisations to share operational data quickly enough for the system to respond.

These examples are encouraging but they remain exceptions. The World Economic Forum estimates that existing digital technologies could enable industries to cut emissions by up to 20%. Schneider Electric, whose industrial software customers span mining, energy and manufacturing operations in over 100 countries, reports that digitally connected operations across its customer base have saved more than 734 million tonnes of CO₂ since 2018.

Most of Australia’s safeguard-covered facilities are nowhere near that potential. The Clean Energy Regulator’s data from the scheme’s second year shows that 140 facilities exceeded their baselines by a combined 13.4 million tonnes, and the majority of compliance so far has relied on purchasing carbon credits rather than onsite abatement. When two-thirds of emission reductions under the scheme come from offsets rather than operational changes, the data infrastructure gap is part of the explanation.

Closing that gap requires more than buying software. Three things need to line up: reliable, standardised data flows between organisations, clear rules for how operational decisions get made from that data, and governance frameworks that give operators, vendors and grid managers enough trust to act on shared information. Many operators still treat process data as proprietary. Interoperability standards for industrial control systems remain fragmented. And the skills to interpret connected data at scale are in short supply across Australian industry.

Weather forecasting became reliable only after decades of institutional cooperation, common standards, agreed data formats and trusted exchange protocols. Industrial data sharing in Australia is at a much earlier stage. But the Safeguard Mechanism is tightening every year, and the facilities that cannot see their own emissions in real time will not find the reductions the scheme demands. BHP’s results show what connected operational data can deliver at site level. AEMO’s transition planning shows how urgently the same principle needs to scale across the grid. The question for the rest of Australian industry is whether it starts building that infrastructure now, or scrambles to buy offsets when baselines tighten further in 2027.

Image credit: iStock.com/metamorworks

Why data centres must rethink water use

Wed, 20 May 2026 00:00:00 +1000

As the Australian Government rolls out new national expectations for data centres and AI infrastructure developers — including responsible water use — scrutiny has sharpened on how the digital backbone of our economy manages this precious resource.

Industry leaders have broadly welcomed these expectations, acknowledging that sustainability, innovation and investment are vital for growth and national interests. Yet, as Data Centres Australia notes, meeting high standards for water efficiency isn’t optional; it’s essential to maintain public trust and secure the licence to grow.

Every time we stream a video, join a virtual meeting, or use an app, we rely on data centres. As demand for digital services grows, so does their footprint.

While much attention is paid to energy use, another critical resource is quietly consumed: water. In a world of increasing freshwater scarcity, we must balance digital innovation with responsible water use.

The cooling conundrum

Data centres run 24/7, generating intense heat, and cooling systems have the greatest impact on the environment.

Operators face a trade-off between energy and water use. Air-cooling avoids water consumption and suits drought-prone areas but uses more electricity. Evaporative cooling is more energy-efficient but relies heavily on water.

There is no single solution. Facilities must be designed around local environmental conditions, reflecting the realities of each community.

Measuring the trade-off

The industry relies on two key metrics: power usage effectiveness (PUE), which measures how efficiently a data centre uses electricity, and water usage effectiveness (WUE), which measures how much water is used for cooling compared to the energy consumed by the IT equipment.

These two metrics must be considered together.

Reducing water use by shifting to air cooling can drive up energy demand. Reporting only one metric risks obscuring the true environmental impact. Transparency across both is essential.

For example, at Equinix we report two different WUE figures: one for our entire data centre portfolio and one exclusively for data centres that use evaporative cooling. In 2024, the last year for which complete statistics are available, these figures were 0.95 and 1.55, respectively.

Moving beyond drinking water

Less than 1% of the Earth’s freshwater is easily accessible. Using high-quality drinking water for cooling is no longer sustainable.

Reclaimed water offers a viable alternative. Treated wastewater, delivered via separate ‘purple pipe’ systems, is well suited for industrial cooling. However, regulatory barriers often prevent its wider use. Updating these frameworks is critical.

Desalination is another option, but it is energy-intensive and can harm coastal ecosystems if not carefully managed. While useful in some contexts, it is not a universal solution.

A sustainable digital future

As the digital economy expands, data centres must stop treating water as an abundant, low-cost resource.

Operators need to assess local water stress, adopt transparent reporting, and invest in alternative water infrastructure in partnership with government and utilities.

A connected future does not have to come at the cost of our water resources. With smarter, localised design and greater use of reclaimed water, the sector can support digital growth while protecting communities and the environment.

Image credit: iStock.com/imaginima

Powering EVs can insulate us against fuel shocks

Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +1000

The latest conflict in the Middle East has reverberated across Australia, with rising fuel prices, supply concerns and predictions of long-term, economy-wide impact.

This is not just another price cycle. It is a reminder of a deeper structural vulnerability in how we power transport, with an extreme dependency on imported fuels. Petrol from the pump here has probably already travelled more than 10,000 kilometres from the Middle East and Asia.

This reliance leaves us exposed to geopolitical instability, supply chain disruption and decisions made far beyond national borders. Global tensions create local impacts.

The latest fuel crisis is being experienced as part of the broader cost-of-living crisis, but its root cause runs deeper — revealing a systemic energy security vulnerability.

As some have advocated, we could accelerate oil and gas production, but this would take time and is ultimately short-sighted. The answer to our fossil fuel dependency is already on our roads, in electric vehicles.

New EV sales have accelerated with the latest fuel crisis, and second-hand prices have followed. Meanwhile, Australia is generating growing volumes of cheaper, renewable electricity. The barrier to wider adoption is no longer charger scarcity, but unequal access to fit-for-purpose infrastructure. For fleets and diesel-dependent sectors such as logistics, construction and industry, grid capacity and planning approvals — not technology — are now the primary constraints.

Victoria and NSW have just announced new strategies to increase EV use and provide essential infrastructure. Corporations are planning more adoption, and the EV sector is ready to invest in the rollout. We need national policies, leadership and coordination to ensure charging infrastructure is available where needed.

The electrification enabler

Electrifying transport offers a long-term shift, replacing imported fuels with locally generated, digitally managed electricity increasingly sourced from renewables. This transforms powering transport from a globally exposed system to one we can shape domestically.

It is not only a decarbonisation pathway. It is a real step towards greater energy independence and resilience.

EV charging infrastructure is the critical enabler of transport electrification. Higher EV adoption cannot occur without well‑planned charging infrastructure. Investment must focus on availability, resilience and integration with the energy system.

Charging networks must be reliable, accessible and designed for how modern energy systems operate. Without this, the risk is a different kind of disruption: congestion at charging sites, inconsistent performance, and pressure on local electricity networks.

With an eye on energy costs and emissions, industry is eager to adopt EVs. Schneider Electric’s recent Energy Tech Pulse survey found that a third of companies plan to deploy electric vehicle charging infrastructure within the next three years, signalling a continued shift towards digitalisation and electrification.

Real-world readiness

We are already seeing rollouts that make a difference. In New South Wales, hospital networks are upgrading EV charging infrastructure to meet government fleet electrification targets. These are complex, 24-hour environments where reliability cannot be compromised.

Rather than undertaking costly grid upgrades, these projects use dynamic load management to balance charging demand in real time, enabling the infrastructure to scale safely within existing capacity.

As electrification accelerates, charging infrastructure becomes part of a broader, more dynamic energy system.

Demand is often concentrated across transport routes, fleet depots, workplaces and public assets. Without coordination, this can drive peak demand, increase costs and require avoidable network upgrades. With the right approach, it becomes manageable.

Digital energy platforms provide real-time visibility and control, allowing operators to balance loads, shift charging to off-peak periods and integrate onsite generation and storage. This is already the direction of travel in modern infrastructure, where energy, power and operations are increasingly managed through unified, software-defined systems.

At a network level, the same principle applies. Electricity systems are becoming more complex as electrification increases, requiring greater coordination, visibility and data-driven decision-making to maintain reliability.

Action is urgent

The current fuel shock has sharpened urgency.

Just two weeks ago the EV industry issued a joint statement, pledging it stood ready to invest, build and operate the public charging infrastructure Australia needs. It stated the industry was “ready to deploy billions of dollars of cumulative investment by 2030” and called for a partnership between government, regulators, networks and industry.

Accelerating EV infrastructure rollout is one of the most practical actions governments and industry can take now to reduce exposure to global fuel markets, strengthen long‑term energy resilience and stabilise transport costs.

Higher EV adoption cannot occur without reliable, well‑planned charging infrastructure. Beyond increasing charger numbers, investment must also focus on resilience and integration with the energy system.

The foundations are already in place with clear policy direction, growing renewable generation and proven technology for smart, scalable charging.

What is needed now is coordination, aligning transport electrification with energy system planning. That means:

planning for future demand
embedding secure and robust digital management from the outset, ensuring infrastructure is scalable and interoperable
integrating charging into broader energy strategies.

Done well, this delivers more than emissions reduction. It stabilises transport costs, supports business confidence and strengthens control over a critical part of the energy system.

By treating EV charging infrastructure as a core component of energy security, instead of just a transport initiative, we can reduce long-term exposure to global instability and build a more resilient transport system.

Image credit: iStock.com/Moment Makers Group. Image for illustrative purposes only.

More could be done for sustainability in Budget, say industry groups

Thu, 14 May 2026 00:00:00 +1000

The Australian Government’s 2026–27 Budget has been released with five main objectives. Get through the global oil shock; provide cost-of-living relief; increase productivity; reform the tax system for workers and first-home buyers; and make the overall budget stronger.

However, many believe what was left off this list, was increasing the country’s growth in sustainability. Industry leaders and environmental organisations have provided strong reviews of Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ Budget after green schemes and future electric vehicle owners took a hit.

Luxury electric vehicle drivers will lose tax exemptions

Electric vehicles (EVs) have become a new staple on Australian roads, with a huge uptake seen in recent years.

The tax exemption through the Electric Car Discount which promoted this EV uptake will be wound down, according to the federal Budget, with EVs worth over $75,000 losing the exemption from April 2027. EVs worth under $75,000 continue to receive the tax exemption until April 2029.

“Polling shows most Australians who bought an EV with the Electric Car Discount wouldn’t have without it, particularly cost-conscious households, blue-collar workers and outer-suburban families,” said NALSPA CEO Rohan Martin. “This budget reflects what Australians want – there is overwhelming support for the government to continue providing financial help for EVs.”

Early reports had stated the government would cut the discount in May’s Budget, so the extra year was celebrated by some industry groups.

Julie Delvecchio, Electric Vehicle Council Chief Executive Officer, said, “The EVC fought hard to retain the Electric Car Discount and we’re glad the government has listened. Keeping the discount [for another year] means more people can continue to access the $3000 annual savings from lower fuel and maintenance bills by switching to an EV. This is real cost-of-living relief, particularly for outer suburban households, where people are driving more and spending more at the bowser.”

Climate Council CEO Amanda McKenzie, however, believes the government could do more.

“People all over the country are clamouring for a broadscale shift to cleaner, more secure solutions like rooftop solar and electric vehicles, which give us control over our own energy. Unfortunately, this Budget leaves too many Australians wanting,” she said.

No new tax on gas exports

Although many expected the government to add a 25% tax hike on the export of gas, the Budget did not announce a new levy, despite estimating that the hike would have raised $17bn for the country annually.

“Taxing gas exports is an effective policy to support essential services and drive the rapid transition to renewables, but the government has misread the mood and missed the moment to do what’s needed,” said David Ritter, CEO of Greenpeace Australia Pacific.

McKenzie’s remarks agreed with this sentiment.

“If the government is serious about intergenerational fairness, the Budget must address not just housing but climate harm landing on young people. We can’t secure young Australians’ futures while expanding coal, oil and gas,” she said.

Green schemes funding axed

The Hydrogen Headstart project will lose government funding as it believes the program was not being adopted as anticipated. This project was providing tax credits for projects producing hydrogen from renewable energy.

Unallocated funding for the Solar Sunshot and Battery Breakthrough Initiative will be withdrawn. Financial savings will be made from other grant schemes, including the Powering the Regions Fund and the National Water Grid Fund.

Blair Palese, founder of Climate Capital Forum and Director of Philanthropy at Ethinvest, said, “In the midst of an energy crisis, this is a budget that has cut $1.3bn from Future Made in Australia, provides nothing to help electrify the freight and transport sectors, [and] creates a cloud of uncertainty with flagged changes to CGT regime for investment in the renewables sector.

“For a world in transition, this budget sends a message that Australia is still stuck in the past — it has missed the opportunity to send a strong signal to clean energy investors that Australia is growing its clean energy commitments and setting the conditions for them to invest in renewable energy projects, jobs and green industrial capability.”

National Environmental Protection Agency to be established

There was a positive win in the Budget for nature — a $500 million package to implement the country’s new nature reforms, including $250 million to establish the National Environmental Protection Agency.

“These laws have the potential to be a game changer for protecting nature and giving greater certainty to business, but their success will depend on sustained investment and strong delivery over time,” said Nicole Forrester, Chief Regenerative Officer, WWF-Australia.

Farmers for Climate Action also welcomed the announcement, with FCA CEO Verity Morgan-Schmidt saying, “We welcome funding for the establishment of the new national Environmental Protection Agency and EPBC implementation, investment in Nature Repair Markets ($36.9m), the commitments to fuel and fertiliser security, and investment in bioregional plans and assessments, alongside the $40m commitment to the rollout of fast EV charging networks and the $1.1bn cleaner fuels program.”

However, Forrester and other environmental groups believe more could be done to improve nature protection.

“This funding is a critical down payment, but it must be followed by ongoing support to ensure the new National Environmental Protection Agency, national standards and data systems are fully operational and effective,” Forrester said.

The Australian Conservation Foundation’s national biodiversity policy advisor, Brendan Sydes, said, “The funding for the new National Environmental Protection Agency is critical to ensure government hits the ground running to get on with the urgent task of improving Australia’s woeful record of enforcing national nature protection laws.

“The investment in Australia’s new environmental watchdog is overshadowed by $153.5m to fast-track approvals and streamline state and territory assessments and approvals.

“There’s no commitment to make sure states and territories strengthen nature protection. If the government is serious about stronger nature protection, it needs to invest in the tools to deliver it — and this budget falls well short.”

Overall, industry and environmental groups see some positive changes to protect and grow the country’s sustainability sector in this year’s Budget, but believe it still falls short in creating long-term change.

“The government could have done much more to expand clean energy and electrification, which can deliver lasting cost of living relief and energy security, while reducing climate pollution,” said Climate Council councillor Nicki Hutley.

Forrester believes the government should invest at least 1% of the Budget in nature.

“Scaling up renewable energy, restoring landscapes and investing in nature-based solutions will reduce energy bills, create regional jobs and build the kind of long-term prosperity that no fuel stockpile can buy.”

For more Budget 2026–27 details, visit the website.

Image credit: iStock.com/RomoloTavani

What the Japanese bullet train can teach us about cutting emissions

Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +1000

In Japan, there is a concept often referred to as “Shinkansen thinking” — inspired by the creation of the bullet train in 1964. At the time, engineers were asked to halve the travel time between Tokyo and Osaka. It was widely seen as impossible.

What followed wasn’t incremental improvement. Engineers reimagined the entire system: the trains, the tracks, the power supply, even the route itself. The result didn’t just change rail travel in Japan — it reset expectations globally.

This is exactly the kind of thinking we need to apply to the way we operate essential infrastructure like water, wastewater, stormwater and transport networks.

Australia’s emissions reduction targets are well known, and often debated. But the bigger challenge is not whether targets are too ambitious or too conservative. The real issue is how we translate them into practical, day-to-day operational decisions across high-energy, asset-intensive sectors.

For water utilities, one of the biggest opportunities to reduce emissions is also one of the most familiar parts of the network: pumps.

Pump performance: where emissions and operations collide

Pumping is one of the largest consumers of energy in water and wastewater systems. Whether moving drinking water across long distances, transferring wastewater between catchments, or managing stormwater during rainfall events, pumps run constantly — and often inefficiently.

Many utilities still operate pumps based on static rules, manual intervention, or historical assumptions about demand and network behaviour. The result is unnecessary energy use, higher operating costs, accelerated asset wear and, ultimately, higher emissions.

This is where modernisation is key. Data gives us insight into the water network and utilities to see how pumps actually perform under real-world conditions. Digital models can bring together hydraulic models, SCADA data, asset condition, energy pricing and demand patterns into a single operational view.

It seems such a simple concept, visibility. Yet having eyes on inefficiencies can have a major impact on emissions reduction targets. Optimising pump schedules can reduce peak energy demand, identify underperforming or oversized pumps that waste power, simulate operational changes before applying them in the real world, and reduce unplanned pump run-time caused by reactive responses to events.

Unless you’re in the industry, things like pump efficiency wouldn’t be top of mind for emissions reduction. But small improvements in pump efficiency, applied consistently across a network, translate directly into measurable reductions in electricity consumption and associated emissions. Importantly, these gains don’t rely on future technology or major capital replacement programs.

From water networks to transport resilience

The emissions story doesn’t stop at the water sector. Transport infrastructure — roads, rail corridors, tunnels and stations — is deeply interconnected with how well we manage stormwater and drainage systems.

Extreme rainfall events are becoming more frequent and more intense. When drainage systems fail or are overwhelmed, the consequences are immediate: flooded roads, closed rail lines, damaged pavements, eroded embankments and unsafe conditions for the public.

Every time a transport corridor is shut down due to flooding, emissions rise. Traffic congestion increases. Freight is delayed. Emergency response and repair crews are mobilised. In many cases, damaged assets must be rebuilt sooner than planned, driving additional embodied carbon.

Stormwater and drainage assets are therefore not just “water infrastructure” — they are critical enablers of low-emission, reliable transport networks. Technology can help us understand how stormwater systems perform under different rainfall scenarios, land use changes and climate conditions. The result is a more holistic view of networks, enabling proactive management of capacity constraints, early identification of high-risk locations, and coordinated planning across water and transport agencies.

By securing drainage performance, we protect transport assets, reduce disruption and avoid the cascading emissions that follow infrastructure failure.

Designing and operating for a lower carbon future

The most important shift is cultural. Like the engineers behind the bullet train, we need to stop asking how to marginally improve existing processes, and instead ask how infrastructure should be designed and operated if emissions reduction were a primary objective.

Tools to support this shift in perspective are already here. What’s required now is the willingness to use it differently — to give engineers and operators the space to think beyond traditional constraints, working together to ensure operations are meeting planning estimates, all the while reducing emissions, saving money and increasing safety of utility teams and the public alike.

The bullet train wasn’t the result of doing things faster. It was the result of doing things differently. If we apply that same mindset to water, stormwater and transport infrastructure, reducing emissions becomes not just achievable, but inevitable.

Image credit: iStock.com/JianGang Wang

Digital water treatment — real-time data for safe and efficient processes

Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +1000

As operators, engineering companies and technology providers exchange views at IFAT, one topic is increasingly taking centre stage: digital process control in water treatment. The focus is less on individual components and more on the question of how measurement data, operating conditions and documentation requirements can be recorded in a structured manner and utilised effectively. Increasing regulatory requirements, more complex plant structures and limited personnel resources are putting pressure on operators in both potable water treatment and wastewater treatment.

Digital systems offer a solution here. They make process data available in real time, provide transparency regarding the plant’s status and support stable, safe plant management. However, what is crucial is not merely data collection, but the ability to derive reliable decision-making bases for operation and maintenance from this data.

Growing complexity in water treatment

Today, potable water treatment and wastewater treatment plants must meet significantly higher requirements than just a few years ago. Limit values are defined more strictly, additional parameters are coming into focus, and documentation requirements are increasing. At the same time, the number of measurement points and control loops is rising.

In practice, this often leads to a fragmented data landscape. Measurement values are scattered across individual controllers or control systems and are only actively monitored in the event of faults or deviations. Opportunities for early process optimisation or for avoiding inefficient operating conditions remain untapped.

This is precisely where digital solutions come in. They link sensor technology, measurement and control technology, and metering systems into a consistent data model and make this information available centrally.

What digital systems must deliver

Regardless of individual manufacturers, the fundamental requirements for digital solutions in water treatment can be clearly defined.

A key prerequisite is continuous transparency of system status. Operators must be able to track current measurement values, trends and operating conditions at all times. This is complemented by alarm functions that report deviations at an early stage and enable targeted intervention.

Another crucial aspect is documentation. In regulated sectors such as potable water treatment or wastewater treatment, the traceable recording of measurement data and interventions is a legal requirement. Digital systems automate these processes and significantly reduce the manual effort involved.

Lastly, safety plays a central role. Remote access and remote monitoring enable analyses and adjustments without staff having to regularly enter hazardous or hard-to-reach areas of the plant.

Case study: Potable water — digital raw water monitoring in Sicily

A project by the Italian water supplier AMAP S.p.A. in Sicily demonstrates how digital solutions are used in practice. The company is responsible for supplying potable water to around 1.2 million people in the Palermo metropolitan area. The raw water comes from various sources and, depending on its origin, must undergo specific pre-treatment before further processing.

Metering technology for raw water treatment at a raw water test station. Image credit: ProMinent

In a total of 120 raw water test stations distributed across the region, metering pumps, sensors and measurement and control technology are digitally networked. The recorded process data is transmitted in real time and monitored centrally. This gives operators a constant overview of metering outputs, measured values and system statuses, even at hard-to-reach locations.

The digital approach improves both operational reliability and efficiency. Processes can be adapted more quickly to changing conditions. At the same time, compliance with regulatory requirements is made easier. Measurement data and operational statuses are centrally available for internal analysis and regulatory reporting.

Practical example of remote monitoring: up to 60 minutes’ time saved per operation

A concrete example illustrates what digital remote monitoring means in practice: SUEZ Water Technologies & Solutions France uses a cloud-based solution with app control for the operation of evaporative cooling systems. Due to Legionella protection requirements, these systems may only be entered whilst wearing protective equipment. The previous service process was correspondingly time-consuming.

Service process before and after using an app. Image credit: ProMinent. [Click on image for a larger version.]

The result: up to 60 minutes’ time saved per call-out and a measurably higher level of occupational safety for service technicians. This model applies directly to water treatment plants: chlorination stations, pumping stations or metering points in hard-to reach areas can be monitored remotely using the same principles.

Digital solutions in wastewater treatment

Digital systems are also gaining in importance in wastewater treatment. Processes such as chemical precipitation, flocculation or pH correction require precise metering in the face of highly fluctuating inflow volumes and loads. Continuous measurement and automated process control allow chemicals and energy to be used more efficiently. Open interfaces enable integration into existing control systems such as SCADA, allowing operators to monitor multiple sites centrally and detect limit violations at an early stage.

Sensors and control technology as a data foundation

Measurement forms the basis of digital water treatment. Modern sensor technology continuously and reliably records relevant parameters such as pH, turbidity, disinfectant residuals or conductivity. In potable water treatment, turbidity often serves as an early indicator of process changes.

If these measured values are processed directly in intelligent measurement and control devices, metering processes can be adjusted automatically. The control loop reacts continuously to changes in water quality, rather than being corrected manually with a time delay.

Digital systems also support the contextualisation of measurement data. Measurement data is not viewed in isolation, but evaluated in conjunction with flow rate, metering capacity and other process parameters.

Added value through central platforms

Cloud-based platforms play a key role in digital water treatment. They enable the secure collection, storage and analysis of large volumes of data. Operators retain control over their data, while access rights are clearly defined.

Another significant advantage lies in scalability. Additional measuring points or plant components can be integrated without fundamentally altering existing systems. At the same time, central platforms enable cross-site comparisons and support predictive maintenance through condition-based analysis.

Operators benefit when hardware and platform are coordinated: commissioning and data communication then run smoothly without interface issues. It is crucial that the platform remains open enough to integrate components from other manufacturers.

Conclusion and outlook

Digital water treatment means more than simply networking individual components. Only the intelligent use of real-time data creates stable processes, increases operational reliability and enables more cost-effective plant management. Against the backdrop of increasing regulatory requirements, digital documentation will continue to grow in importance.

Discussions at IFAT clearly show that digital solutions are now an integral part of modern water treatment. What matters is practical implementation as a tool for safe and efficient operation.

For detailed information on digital water treatment and its integration into existing control concepts, speak to ProMinent experts at IFAT 2026: Hall A3, Stand 451 and Hall C1, Stand 316.

Top image caption: Remote control of metering pumps via smartphone, access to pump values and settings from a safe distance. Image credit: ProMinent

How this Sydney CBD tower achieved a 6-star NABERS waste rating

Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +1100

In Sydney’s CBD, a 51-level premium commercial tower has quietly achieved something extraordinary: a 6-star NABERS waste rating — the highest possible rating under the national benchmarking system.

Only a small number of buildings nationally have reached 6 stars. Two of only three known 6-star NABERS waste-rated buildings in Sydney’s CBD are maintained by SKG Services, a 100% Australian-owned family business that has delivered cleaning, maintenance and security services for 50 years.

But the result was not achieved through surface-level sustainability initiatives or upgraded bin systems. It was the outcome of a comprehensive, whole-of-building waste management overhaul designed to deliver measurable ESG performance.

A familiar commercial building problem

Like many large commercial towers, the building was heavily reliant on general waste streams. Waste data lacked visibility across tenants and floors. Contamination risks were high. Reporting was fragmented.

While sustainability ambitions existed, there was limited ability to measure performance accurately or demonstrate genuine ESG progress.

Without reliable data and coordinated systems, waste management remained reactive. Improvement was difficult to quantify, and landfill diversion remained lower than desired.

Rethinking waste as infrastructure

The facilities services team approached the challenge not as a cleaning issue, but as an operational opportunity. The objective was clear: redesign the entire waste ecosystem to move from fragmented disposal to coordinated diversion.

The transformation began with a fundamental redesign of the building’s waste streams.

Redesigning the waste system

A mixed recycling model was introduced to capture materials that had previously been sent to general waste. Bin ratios were reversed to favour recycling over landfill and organics were separated.

Most importantly, waste collection was centralised to a single onsite processing area equipped with a weigh station — every waste stream is now weighed or recorded before leaving the building. This shift from estimated volumes to verified measurement changed everything.

Data-driven accountability

Measurement alone is not enough without visibility.

A QR-enabled tracking system was introduced to log waste by building, floor and tenant. This level of detail allows building management to identify patterns, contamination risks and improvement opportunities in real time.

Unlike traditional quarterly or periodic waste audits, contamination monitoring now occurs daily, meaning issues can be addressed in real time rather than months later. Monthly reporting provides building owners and asset managers with clear ESG data, including:

waste volumes by stream
diversion rates
contamination levels
identified risks
improvement opportunities.

This data-driven approach has shifted waste management from an operational task to a measurable performance metric.

Behaviour change through engagement

Infrastructure alone does not deliver transformation. Tenant engagement proved equally critical, driven through pop-up activations and ‘trash-talking’ sessions which took place with all tenant representatives. Rather than enforcing change through policy alone, the program focused on communication and participation.

Standardised, co-branded signage was rolled out across common areas and tenancies to eliminate confusion caused by inconsistent labelling systems. Clear messaging and visual consistency significantly reduced contamination. The engagement strategy created a sense of shared accountability between building management and tenants.

Expanding the waste ecosystem

The project extended beyond basic recycling.

A single operator now manages the collection and management of all waste streams across the building, including:

organics
reduced general waste
secure paper destruction
onsite baled paper and cardboard recycling
coffee cups, batteries and e-waste
light tubes and toner cartridges
construction waste partnerships.

Recovered materials are either recycled, composted or converted into Processed Engineered Fuel (PEF), helping reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

The approach prioritises circular outcomes wherever possible, ensuring materials are diverted from landfill and re-enter productive use streams.

The results: from 2.5 to 6 stars

Within the first year of implementation, the building’s NABERS Waste rating increased from 2.5 stars to 5 stars.

By the second year, it had achieved 6 stars — the highest rating possible. The uplift was structural and reflected redesigned systems, consistent measurement, tenant engagement and continuous monitoring. Most importantly, the building now has defensible ESG reporting supported by verified data.

Lessons for commercial buildings

This case highlights several key lessons for other commercial towers facing similar challenges:

Waste needs governance — measurement, accountability and reporting are critical to achieving real outcomes.
Centralised processing and data collection are game changers — without tracking, diversion claims lack credibility.
Behaviour change requires education and consistency — signage, communication and tenant engagement drive measurable results.
Daily monitoring prevents regression — contamination management must be continuous, not periodic.
Circular thinking unlocks additional value — waste streams can become inputs for other industries, reducing environmental impact.

With new NABERS waste rules now in effect and ESG expectations increasing, commercial buildings can no longer rely on optics or high-level sustainability statements. Investors, tenants and regulators increasingly expect data-backed performance.

*Tracey Broers is Group General Manager Risk at SKG Services, a national commercial cleaning, maintenance and security services company with a 50-year history.

Top image credit: iStock.com/CreativaImages

Refrigerant recovery: the overlooked lever in Australia's net-zero transition

Wed, 01 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +1100

When Australians think about climate action, the focus tends to fall on renewable energy, electric vehicles or large‑scale industrial reform. These are essential shifts. But there is another, largely unpriced source of emissions embedded in our everyday infrastructure — the refrigerators, freezers and air conditioners cycling out of Australian homes, businesses and logistics networks each year.

Refrigerants, the engineered gases that underpin modern cold chains and thermal comfort, are among the most climate‑intensive substances still moving through our economy. Gases used in fridges and air conditioners can be many hundreds, and in some cases around 1500 times stronger than carbon dioxide in terms of warming, so even small leaks have a big climate impact, especially when appliances are dumped or dismantled without proper degassing.

Millions of appliances reach the end of their life in Australia each year, but only a portion of the gas inside them is captured, and recovery is even poorer for older models that still contain banned ozone‑depleting chemicals. It’s also no longer just those legacy gases we need to worry about: some of the newer ‘safer’ refrigerants can break down into substances like trifluoroacetic acid, a type of PFAS that lingers in the environment and is now being detected in waterways. Yet Australia still lacks an integrated, whole‑of‑appliance framework that treats refrigerant leakage, materials recovery and illegal dumping as a single system problem.

On the ground, the highest risk of leakage begins the moment an end‑of‑life appliance leaves the home. Without deliberate collection, transport and degassing processes, gases are easily lost in transit, turning everyday white goods into a significant but preventable emissions source. Retailer‑led take‑back programs, such as Appliances Online’s, show what good looks like: by building free removal and recycling into the standard customer experience, they make it easy for households to responsibly return old fridges and freezers.

“By making it easy for customers to return old fridges and freezers, we can prevent emissions, recover valuable materials, and embed circular economy practices across the industry and for consumers,” said Alice Kuepper, Head of Sustainability, Appliances Online, underscoring how retailers can turn end‑of‑life appliances from a liability into part of the climate solution.

These kinds of programs show that refrigerant recovery is not waiting for new technology. The processes already exist to safely capture, reclaim or destroy gases at scale. The real constraint is structural: our policy, stewardship and market settings have not kept pace with the risk in circulation.

Existing refrigerant collection and rebate mechanisms have created an important baseline for industry participation, but on their own, they cannot overcome the cost and coordination barriers to comprehensive recovery and address free-rider risks. Coupled with a whole‑of‑appliance rethink (where the cabinet, metals and gases are governed under a coherent, scheme‑based architecture), these mechanisms could deliver far greater impact than they do today.

Crucially, this is not a cold start for government. The Commonwealth has already undertaken extensive consultation on e‑waste and appliance stewardship; the evidence base and stakeholder input is there. In New South Wales, market‑leading approaches such as the Product Lifecycle Responsibility Act 2025, championed by Minister Penny Sharpe, have created a mandate to address high‑impact product categories across their full lifecycle.

Within that kind of framework, there is a clear opportunity to establish a dedicated e‑waste and large‑appliance stewardship instrument that hardwires refrigerant capture, repair and high‑value materials recovery into how these products are designed, sold and retired.

From where I sit, working across stewardship, circularity and market design, refrigerant recovery is a textbook example of where architecture, not technology, is the binding constraint. Local governments cannot keep absorbing the costs of problematic waste flows and illegal dumping while high‑impact gases leak from our system. Industry is asking for clearer, nationally consistent rules of the game. Consumers deserve confidence that doing the right thing with old appliances is simple, affordable and effective.

We now need bold, bipartisan political leadership on stewardship. Industry is demanding it, communities and councils are bearing the cost of delay, and consumers have every right to expect that climate‑intensive products are governed across their full lifecycle. If Australia is serious about net zero, we cannot afford to ignore the emissions already in circulation. Refrigerant recovery is one of the simplest and most immediate climate wins available to us, provided we move from fragmented programs to a durable, scheme‑based architecture that aligns policy, governance, capital and operations.

For further information, please see the white paper on the Circularity for Climate website.

Image credit: iStock.com/biffspandex

Closing the policy gap: the case for fibre transparency in Australia's fashion industry

Tue, 31 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +1100

As of 2019, Australia’s last mandatory textile fibre content labelling laws lapsed. Even then, these requirements applied only in New South Wales, with the national fibre labelling standards having already fallen away following the introduction of the Australian Consumer Law in January 2011. Today, only care labels are legally required for clothing and household textiles in Australia, not fibre content.

While many brands continue to voluntarily provide fibre content information, consumers may have noticed a steady decline in specificity. Products are increasingly described as “cotton rich” or “cotton/elastane”, rather than listing the precise material compositions such as 95% cotton and 5% elastane.

This erosion of basic product information represents a step backwards for both transparency and sustainability. The clothing and textiles sector is already flooded with greenwashing. In the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s 2023 sweep of environmental claims, textiles, garments and footwear were identified as one of the most problematic sectors. At the same time, clothing and textiles are increasingly entering the wellness space, with products making often unsubstantiated health-related claims such as anti-microbial, anti-odour, wicking, cooling, etc.

There are multiple risks associated with this lack of clarity. First, consumers — already navigating a landscape of greenwashing — are placed at an even greater disadvantage when the most fundamental information about a product’s material composition is missing or vague. For those with clear fibre preferences, such as a desire for natural fibres, it becomes increasingly difficult to make informed purchasing choices. This is further complicated by the fact that many synthetic and semi-synthetic fibres were developed to mimic more expensive natural fibres, such as silk. A silk garment, for instance, is typically significantly more expensive than a visually similar viscose, rayon or polyester alternative. Without clear labelling, it may be nearly impossible for the average consumer to determine whether a product is genuinely silk, or something else.

Second, the absence of accurate fibre composition data poses a significant barrier to Australia’s transition to a circular clothing economy by 2030. With Seamless — Australia’s first clothing product stewardship scheme — launching in June 2024, national attention is turning to reuse, recycling and end-of-life solutions. However, many of these systems rely on precise knowledge of fibre composition, and garments that are 100% of a single, natural fibre such as cotton, wool or silk have the most potential and highest value for re-use and recycling.

Recycling options for blended fibres remain especially limited, with most destined for mechanical recycling (eg, downcycled into shredded fibres for filling or non-woven mats). Those that do exist — such as BlockTexx’s chemical separation technology — are typically restricted to specific blends, most commonly cotton/polyester. And there are currently no viable recycling technologies for elastane, meaning that all garments containing elastane (spandex) are effectively destined for landfill or waste-to-energy processes.

Although technologies such as near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy can be used to identify and sort textiles, they are not yet widely implemented in Australia. As a result, most sorting still relies on manual processes, with workers dependent on the information provided on fibre content labels — if it is available at all.

Meanwhile, the European Union is moving decisively in the opposite direction, introducing more comprehensive product information requirements through initiatives such as the Digital Product Passport and the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), due to commence in 2027. In comparison, Australia appears significantly behind, lacking even the most basic fibre composition requirements.

It is time for Australia to follow suit by requiring more information — not less — on clothing and textile products. Both food and cosmetics are subject to ingredient labelling requirements, with contents listed in descending order by volume or mass. This reflects their direct interaction with the body: food is ingested, and cosmetics are applied to the skin. Yet clothing and household textiles — worn daily and in constant contact with our bodies — are not held to the same standard.

If food and cosmetics must disclose every ingredient, why shouldn’t clothing and textiles? And how might our purchasing decisions change if we knew whether a fabric was derived from fossil fuels, old-growth forests, or involved the use of restricted or potentially harmful chemicals?

Image credit: iStock.com/brazzo

How Australia's built environment is navigating sustainability communications

Thu, 26 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +1100

Ask any sustainability professional in Australia’s built environment sector what keeps them up at night, and the answer is increasingly less likely to be about materials or energy ratings. It’s about words. Specifically, which ones are safe to use.

That’s the central finding of the ‘Australian Built Environment Communications Report: Navigating Sustainability Claims in an Era of Scrutiny’, produced following an industry roundtable convened by the Anti-Greenwash Charter in late 2025. Drawing on the candid perspectives of architects, government advisors, sustainability consultants, product manufacturers and industry advocates, the report maps the communication terrain that practitioners have to navigate daily. Its findings reveal this terrain to be far more treacherous than most realise.

A sector uniquely exposed

The built environment has always been subject to scrutiny on its environmental performance. Buildings account for a substantial share of global emissions, and the sector has been quick to adopt the language of net zero, low-carbon materials and sustainable design. But unlike, say, a fast-moving consumer goods company making a product circularity claim, built environment organisations deal in complexity that compounds communication risk at every turn.

A single development project can involve dozens of stakeholders across the supply chain, including architects, engineers, contractors, material manufacturers, and eventually, tenants. Each contribute to the project’s final sustainability outcome. An embodied carbon figure depends on supplier-provided Environmental Product Declarations that vary in quality and methodology. An energy performance claim may be based on modelled, rather than measured, outcomes. A design certification can reflect intended performance rather than operational reality.

This is the gap between design intent and built performance that the report identifies as a fundamental credibility challenge. Unfortunately, it’s also one the sector has been slow to address. Post-occupancy evaluation, for example, remains inconsistently applied in Australia. That means promises made at the development application stage are rarely tested against what is actually delivered.

The ambition-defensibility paradox

At the heart of the report’s findings is what it describes as an ambition versus defensibility paradox. Organisations face simultaneous, competing pressures: commercial and reputational imperatives reward demonstrating sustainability leadership, but a tightening regulatory environment demands every claim be fully substantiated.

Australia now leads the world in greenwashing enforcement. The ACCC and ASIC have both made environmental claims a top enforcement priority, with penalties reaching into the tens of millions.

For practitioners, that enforcement activity is creating a chilling effect. Several roundtable participants reported actively reducing their external sustainability communications over the past 12 to 18 months. The calculus has shifted, with the reputational upside of sustainability leadership being weighed against the downside of regulatory scrutiny. Silence is winning.

Greenhushing: the risk hiding in plain sight

The report is particularly pointed in its treatment of greenhushing. While excessive caution may reduce short-term regulatory exposure, the report argues it creates a different, longer-term problem. If organisations achieving genuine progress stay silent while those making exaggerated claims continue to communicate, stakeholders lose the ability to distinguish leaders from laggards.

Information asymmetry increases, trust erodes, and the credibility crisis deepens. This can happen even as the underlying sustainability work improves. For a sector that depends on investor confidence, planning approvals and a social license to operate, that erosion carries real commercial consequences.

The governance gap

One of the report’s more practically useful observations concerns the internal mechanics of how sustainability communications get produced. In most organisations, the process fragments across multiple functions. Sustainability teams prioritise accuracy and comprehensive disclosure. Marketing teams prioritise clarity and competitive positioning. Legal teams prioritise risk mitigation.

Project delivery teams, who hold the most detailed knowledge of actual performance, are rarely involved in external communications at all.

The result is what the report calls the “marketing-sustainability-legal triangle”, a dynamic in which each function pulls in a different direction without clear decision-making authority or shared risk tolerance. Approval processes introduced to combat greenwashing have become, in some cases, a new source of dysfunction. One participant observed that by the time legal is comfortable with language, the messaging has been hedged and qualified into meaninglessness.

Stronger governance structures such as evidence libraries, claim inventories, and structured approval systems with clearly defined roles, are among the report’s practical recommendations for addressing this fragmentation.

The path forward: credibility over caution

The report does not suggest that the answer to greenwashing anxiety is to stop communicating. Rather, the sector needs to shift from reactive caution to proactive credibility. It must build the internal infrastructure and industry-wide standards that allow organisations to communicate sustainability progress with confidence.

That means regular audits of public sustainability claims, documentation of supporting evidence, and greater collaboration between regulators and industry bodies to develop sector-specific guidance and safe harbours for credible disclosure. It also means being honest about uncertainty. The sector must acknowledge methodological complexities behind elements like embodied carbon figures, for instance, rather than present them as more definitive than they are.

Ultimately, the report frames this as a competitive opportunity. Those organisations that invest now in credible, transparent communication are building a key asset: stakeholder trust. This will only appreciate in value as regulatory and market scrutiny intensifies. Credibility, the report concludes, may soon become the most valuable sustainability credential in the built environment.

The full report can be found on the Anti-Greenwash Charter website.

Image credit: iStock.com/Eoneren

The hidden sustainability opportunity in Australia's construction

Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +1100

Australia’s construction industry sits at the centre of the nation’s sustainability challenge. As governments, investors and communities increasingly align around net zero targets, the sector is being asked to deliver more infrastructure, more housing and more resilience, while materially reducing environmental impact.

Much of the sustainability discussion in construction has focused on materials and asset performance. Low-carbon concrete, recycled steel and energy-efficient buildings are rightly seen as essential levers in reducing emissions. Yet an equally powerful driver of decarbonisation often receives less attention: the efficiency of construction delivery itself.

From an ESG and policy perspective, this matters deeply. For most major projects, the majority of embodied carbon sits within Scope 3 emissions, such as upstream manufacturing, transport, rework, extended programs and inefficient material use. These emissions are harder to measure, but they’re also where some of the fastest and most scalable reductions can be achieved.

When projects are better planned and coordinated, sustainability becomes embedded in day-to-day delivery. Avoiding rework eliminates wasted materials and unnecessary transport. Clearer sequencing reduces idle plant and site congestion.

Earlier alignment between design, fabrication and installation ensures steel is used precisely as intended, lowering tonnage and waste. Incrementally, these improvements compound into meaningful reductions in embodied carbon, while also improving productivity, safety and cost certainty.

This is where modern construction systems and technology play a critical role. Digital coordination platforms, automation and robotics are not abstract innovations; they are practical enablers of lower-emissions construction. By increasing accuracy and predictability, they directly reduce Scope 3 impacts associated with excess material, remanufacture, double-handling and extended construction durations.

Importantly, these tools are workforce-positive. Automation is not about replacing people; it is about supporting skilled teams by removing repetitive and high-risk tasks and allowing experience and judgment to be applied where it adds the most value. From an ESG standpoint, this delivers benefits across environmental, social and governance pillars simultaneously by achieving safer work, more predictable delivery and lower carbon outcomes.

The opportunity is to view efficiency as a cornerstone of sustainable construction. Through earlier design integration, smarter sequencing, and automated fabrication and installation processes, projects can achieve measurable reductions in material usage and waste while improving productivity and build quality. Sustainability is not treated as an overlay; instead it becomes a direct outcome of how work flows from design to site.

Our partnerships with Danish automation leader GMT Robotics and Progress Group reflect this shared commitment. From early 2026, Australia will see the introduction of new advanced reinforcement robotics and automation systems, supported locally. Internationally, these technologies have delivered faster, reduced labour intensity, and materially lowered waste and rehandling, translating directly into lower Scope 3 emissions across the construction lifecycle.

For policymakers, asset owners and construction leaders, this represents an important insight. Decarbonising construction is not only about specifying greener materials, but also about modernising the systems that govern how projects are delivered. Digital coordination, automation and integrated planning provide immediate, scalable pathways to reduce emissions while strengthening delivery outcomes.

The call to action is clear. As Australia continues to invest in major infrastructure and housing, sustainability criteria must extend beyond materials to include delivery efficiency, coordination maturity and emissions embedded in process. Industry leaders, government clients and delivery partners all have a role to play in encouraging early collaboration, data-driven planning and adoption of proven technologies that reduce waste before it occurs.

Sustainability starts long before the first concrete is poured. It begins with precision, alignment and a shared commitment to continual improvement. The Australian construction industry already has the capability, expertise and resilience required. By continuing to embrace more connected ways of building, it can lead the transition to net zero delivery and achieve stronger outcomes for projects, people and the planet alike.

Image credit: iStock.com/Fahroni

Partnership creates national manufacturing roadmap

Wed, 18 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +1100

The Australian Fashion Council (AFC) and R.M.Williams have launched the National Manufacturing Strategy for Australian Fashion and Textiles 2026–2036 at Parliament House in Canberra.

The National Manufacturing Strategy is the first coordinated national roadmap to rebuild targeted domestic manufacturing capability across Australia’s textile, clothing and footwear (TCF) sector.

It was unveiled at a breakfast symposium and AFC member showcase in Mural Hall attended by over 90 industry and parliamentary guests, including members of the Parliamentary Friends of Australian Fashion & Textiles, and its co-chairs, Matt Burnell MP, Dai Le MP and Zoe McKenzie MP.

As the official print and projection partner of the Australian Fashion Council, Epson said it fully supports the Strategy, its outcomes and pillars that firmly promote Australia’s onshore manufacturing capabilities.

“Epson is firmly committed to our partnership with the Australian Fashion Council and our joint goals around improving local manufacturing, furthering innovation and developing digital transformation,” said Craig Heckenberg, Managing Director, Epson Australia.

“This National Manufacturing Strategy represents an important step forward for Australia’s fashion and textile industry. Epson is proud to support this initiative and help accelerate the adoption of advanced digital technologies that can drive greater sustainability, unlock new opportunities and create the jobs of the future.”

The 10-year Strategy is the result of almost a year of industry consultation led by the AFC and R.M.Williams, including 14 national consultations with manufacturers, brands, educators and policymakers across the country. More than 300 stakeholders contributed to the process, generating over 1000 proposed initiatives and nearly 900 votes on strategic priorities to shape the sector’s long-term manufacturing future.

Rather than compete against high-volume offshore manufacturing markets, the Strategy is focused on closing structural gaps and accelerating advanced manufacturing to scale the sector’s comparative advantage, aiming to position Australia to compete globally in premium, technology-enabled and traceable production, built on the country’s natural fibre strengths.

Outcome Comparative Advantage	Comparative Advantage
1. Capture more value from Australian fibre	Australia is a leading producer of premium natural fibres, including wool and cotton. Expanding domestic processing and spinning enables more of that value to be captured onshore.
2. Strengthen sovereign manufacturing capability	Australia has capability in specialised textile products where quality, compliance and supply security matter, including defence, healthcare and emergency service applications.
3. Build a globally competitive premium sector	Australia’s strength lies in high-quality, traceable and sustainably produced textiles and apparel, supported by natural fibres, strong design capability and advanced manufacturing.

Table 1: Strategy outcomes & Australia’s comparative advantage

The Strategy outlines three strategic pillars underpinned by industry and government coordination as the levers required to deliver these outcomes by 2036.

Strategic Pillar	Focus
1. Activate and drive demand	Demand is the critical enabler. Strategic public procurement (federal and state) can anchor it, while Australian-made identification and coordinated national promotion can extend it through to consumer sectors.
2. Secure the workforce of the future	Create new skilled pathways for advanced manufacturing roles, enable skills transfer (median age of manufacturer is 57), protect women’s contribution and participation (58% of TCF manufacturers are women) and support the diverse communities in the sector (41% are from CALD communities).
3. Accelerate advanced manufacturing	Co-invest in modern machinery, new technologies and advanced manufacturing, rebuild early-stage fibre processing and yarn spinning — the sector's ‘missing middle’ — and enable innovation in circular manufacturing and fibre-to-fibre recycling.

Table 2: Strategy pillars & coordination

An economic case for action

Independent modelling by RMIT University found that full implementation of the Strategy’s coordinated policy platform will grow TCF manufacturing value added from $2.6 to $2.9 billion by 2030/31, delivering a cumulative $1.4 billion economic dividend over five years. The Strategy is also projected to create more than 1000 new skilled jobs and $864 million in additional wages, with approximately half of those jobs projected to be filled by women.

The Strategy’s launch at Parliament House marked an important moment for Australia’s fashion and textile industry. To showcase the capability already operating in Australia, AFC members from across the manufacturing sector presented a cross-section of domestic production. The showcase featured R.M.Williams, Bianca Spender, Bond-Eye Australia, Clothing the Gaps, ABMT, Sylvia P, Waverley Mills, Silver Fleece and Stewart & Heaton.

The AFC and R.M.Williams also produced a short film titled ‘Made Here, Worn Everywhere’ profiling AFC members including Australian Defence Apparel, The Social Outfit, Maara Collective, Citizen Wolf, Waverley Mills and Silver Fleece, highlighting the diversity of manufacturing already taking place across Australia.

You can watch the short film ‘Made Here, Worn Everywhere’ below.

What’s next: foundation to 2029

The Strategy will be led by the Australian Fashion Council as the peak body for the sector. Progress will be measured through a two-stage assessment framework.

Implementation review (to 2029): This phase will assess progress in establishing the core architecture underpinning the Strategy, including procurement reform, national capability mapping, skills recognition pilots, shared manufacturing infrastructure and governance arrangements to coordinate delivery.
Strategic outcomes review (to 2036): This phase will assess progress against the Strategy’s long-term ambition — a competitive, technology-enabled and domestically anchored manufacturing sector with a sustainable workforce pipeline and globally recognised market position.

The National Manufacturing Strategy for Australian Fashion & Textiles is supported by the Parliamentary Friends of Australian Fashion & Textiles group, co-chaired by Matt Burnell MP, Dai Le MP and Zoe McKenzie MP, with more than 60 bipartisan members across Parliament.

The Strategy can be viewed on the AFC website.

Top image caption: The National Manufacturing Strategy for Australian Fashion and Textiles 2026–2036 launch at Parliament House in Canberra. Image: Supplied.

WtE in Australia: beyond the myth of 'burning rubbish'

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +1100

Australia’s energy transition and waste challenge are converging. As landfills reach capacity, emissions targets tighten and electricity systems seek firm, dispatchable power, waste‑to‑energy (WtE) is increasingly part of the conversation. Yet despite decades of safe operation overseas, WtE in Australia is often reduced to a misleading slogan: ‘burning rubbish’.

A vocal minority is actively campaigning against WtE, frequently drawing on outdated examples and selective claims rather than the modern evidence base. The result is that communities can be pushed towards the false choice of ‘incineration vs the environment’, when the real comparison is usually WtE versus continued landfilling of residual waste.

WtE sits after avoidance, reuse and recycling in the waste hierarchy. It is designed to treat residual waste — material that remains once recyclables have been removed — and recover value as electricity and/or heat. It should never be positioned as a competitor to recycling; it is a back‑end solution for what cannot practically be recycled and a way to deal responsibly with what’s left over. If you want a serious landfill‑diversion strategy, you need a credible solution for residuals — and you need to evaluate it on today’s science, not yesterday’s images.

Why does that matter? Because landfill is not benign. Landfills produce pollution streams including leachate and landfill gas, and these pollutants can degrade surrounding surface water bodies, groundwater, soil and air if not properly managed. Methane from decomposing organic waste is a particular concern. Regulators emphasise that when organic waste decomposes in landfill it releases methane, a potent greenhouse gas, and that landfill methane makes a material contribution to emissions inventories.

This is where WtE changes the equation. By diverting residual waste away from landfill, WtE avoids the methane that would otherwise be generated through anaerobic decomposition. Put simply, it removes a key driver of long‑term landfill emissions. That does not make WtE ‘zero impact’ — no infrastructure is — but it means the comparison must include the avoided landfill burden, not just the stack.

So what about air emissions? Modern facilities are engineered and regulated to operate within stringent, health‑protective limits, using multi‑stage flue gas cleaning (filters, scrubbers and other systems) and continuous emissions monitoring. The point is not to dismiss concerns, but to address them with transparent data, conservative design and independent oversight.

International experience is instructive. Germany has effectively eliminated municipal waste landfilling at scale, relying on high recycling alongside thermal treatment capacity; Switzerland has long treated residual waste through well‑regulated plants that also recover energy; and the UK has used energy‑from‑waste within a wider framework while progressively reducing biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfill. These countries show that WtE can sit inside strong environmental regulation and coexist with high recycling, when capacity is sized to residuals and policy keeps the hierarchy intact.

Australia does not need to copy these systems wholesale. But the principles transfer well: keep recycling first, size facilities to residuals, regulate tightly, disclose performance, and engage early and honestly. Crucially, public debate should reflect what the technology is today. When campaigns present WtE as uncontrolled incineration, they risk steering communities back towards the very outcome most of us agree is worst: continued landfill dependence, with methane emissions and long‑term environmental liabilities.

Waste‑to‑energy is not a silver bullet for Australia’s waste or energy challenges. It is, however, a practical tool for managing residual waste while contributing reliable, local energy. The task now is to have an evidence‑based conversation — and to judge options against the real alternative. When the choice is WtE or more landfill, the environmental comparison looks very different.

To move forward, Australia needs to treat WtE like any other regulated industrial asset: define clear performance standards, publish emissions and operating data in plain language and require independent auditing. Communities should expect rigorous approvals, conservative dispersion modelling and enforceable conditions, not vague promises. Equally, policymakers should be honest about trade‑offs: if residual waste is not treated, it is landfilled, with methane generation and long‑term leachate management obligations that do not disappear when the gate closes.

The most constructive debate is therefore comparative. Ask: which option delivers lower lifecycle emissions, lower local impacts, and higher accountability over decades?

If we keep recycling at the front end and hold WtE plants to strict transparency at the back end, Australia can reduce landfill reliance without compromising health or environmental standards. And that is where the evidence points.

Image caption: Waste-to-energy plant in Bulgaria. Credit: iStock.com/Cylonphoto

Extreme weather is reshaping Australia's water systems

Thu, 12 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +1100

Australian water utilities are no strangers to climate variability. But the scale, frequency and intensity of extreme weather events now impacting the nation’s infrastructure represent a structural shift, not a seasonal challenge.

In January alone, heatwaves affected much of the country, with many locations reaching maximum temperatures between 45 and 49°C and breaking decades-long local records.

These sustained heat events are not simply testing supply. They are accelerating evaporation losses, increasing demand and placing stress on aging water infrastructure across already-strained distribution systems.

Consider that national surface water storage has slipped to approximately 70% capacity, while the Murray–Darling Basin fell from 93% in 2023 to around 61% in 2025. In Victoria, total available water volume across surface, groundwater, recycled water and desalination fell by more than 28,000 gigalitres during the 2023–2024 reporting year — equivalent to roughly 11.2 million Olympic swimming pools.

Adapting to this new reality requires more than expanding supply. It demands a shift towards intelligence-led operations that help utilities see emerging stress earlier, manage water more precisely and build climate resilience into everyday network decisions.

Climate pressure is translating into operational strain

Extreme heat events are also increasing the energy intensity of water operations. As temperatures rise, utilities must increase pumping and pressure management activities to maintain supply and service levels — driving higher energy consumption across already energy-intensive water networks. When utilities are under increasing pressure to reduce operational emissions, heat-driven inefficiencies such as leaks, pressure imbalances and avoidable bursts can translate directly into unnecessary energy use. This compounds both water loss and carbon output during peak climate stress events.

Simultaneously, aging pipe networks, many of which were not designed to withstand sustained thermal stress, expand, contract and weaken under temperature extremes. This increases the likelihood of bursts, leaks and failures across already-stretched distribution systems.

For utilities, the greatest risk often lies not in the failure itself, but in the inability to see it forming in real time.

The visibility gap in a climate-impacted network

Historically, many Australian water networks have operated with limited real-time visibility across their distribution infrastructure. Data from smart meters, sensors, supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) platforms, and customer systems frequently exists in isolation, fragmented across legacy technologies and platforms that cannot communicate effectively with one another.

This fragmentation forces operators to make critical decisions with only a partial view of their network.

A utility may detect pressure fluctuations in one zone, for example, but lack the integrated data required to determine whether the root cause is aging infrastructure, pump settings or sudden changes in consumption patterns during a heatwave event. Similarly, customer complaints about low pressure or unexpectedly high usage may not correlate in real time with sensor alerts or asset performance data.

Without a unified operational picture, utilities are often forced into reactive modes — responding to bursts and outages after they occur rather than identifying early indicators of system stress. As climate extremes intensify, this reactive approach becomes increasingly unsustainable.

From reactive response to resource stewardship

Intelligence-driven technologies are helping utilities transition from crisis response to proactive resilience. By treating data as a strategic asset and embedding visibility across the network, utilities can better anticipate system stress and respond to rapidly changing environmental conditions.

This shift towards proactive optimisation reflects a broader trend across Australian industry. According to the Tech Council of Australia’s 2026 Australian Tech Leaders Survey, 47% of leaders now see using technology to drive operational efficiency as the greatest opportunity for business in the year ahead — reinforcing a growing focus on resilience and performance over expansion.

Smart water meters and distributed IoT sensors are foundational to this shift. These devices capture granular data across the distribution network, while advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) enables remotely enabled endpoints to transmit that data to central platforms as frequently as every 15 minutes. The more frequently this data is collected, the faster utilities can detect anomalies, identify potential leaks and respond to emerging system stress in near real time.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning further extend these capabilities by enabling predictive maintenance programs. By analysing historical and current performance data, these tools can forecast where infrastructure is likely to fail, allowing utilities to prioritise high-risk assets and schedule repairs before a burst occurs.

This approach is particularly valuable during extreme weather events, when emergency response costs and service disruptions can escalate quickly. Proactive intervention not only reduces operational expenditure but also helps preserve increasingly scarce water resources by limiting non-revenue water loss across the network.

Integrating data to drive sustainable water management

Equally important is the integration of data across traditionally siloed systems. Unified platforms that consolidate inputs from smart meters, geographic information systems (GIS), asset management tools and selected SCADA datasets allow utilities to correlate trends, balance pressure across zones and optimise distribution in real time.

With this level of insight, utilities can respond dynamically to changing demand during heatwaves, detect abnormal usage patterns, and enhance customer support — all from a single operational dashboard.

Policy reform, including the renewed National Water Agreement (2024), reflects a growing national emphasis on climate-resilient water management. However, policy alone cannot deliver the operational resilience required to navigate an era defined by environmental volatility.

Real progress depends on utilities accelerating the adoption of intelligence-driven technologies that transform network data into actionable insight.

Resilience will be defined by intelligence, not just infrastructure

Many utilities already possess foundational technologies capable of supporting predictive analytics and real-time monitoring. The priority now lies in integrating these systems, closing visibility gaps, and fostering a workforce equipped to interpret and act on emerging insights.

As extreme weather continues to intensify and water availability becomes less predictable, the ability to anticipate network stress, rather than simply react to it, will define the next generation of resilient utilities.

At a time when every drop counts, intelligence-driven operations are no longer optional. They are essential to securing Australia’s water future.

Bruce Kain, Director of Water, Australia, New Zealand & Pacific, APAC, Itron.

Top image credit: iStock.com/Catalin-Ilie Capilnean

2026 utility predictions: the race to rule the energy future

Tue, 03 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +1100

A new kind of global race is underway, one that’s not about military might or space exploration, but about energy. From Washington to Beijing, London to Ottawa, countries are competing to become the world’s next energy superpowers. This race is about more than just keeping the lights on; it’s about shaping the future of economies, climate policy and geopolitical influence.

Global ambitions and high stakes

The United States is rapidly scaling up its clean energy infrastructure, driven by landmark legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes massive incentives for renewable energy, electric vehicles, and domestic manufacturing of green technologies. While facing pressure under the current administration, a full repeal of IRA is considered unlikely due to bipartisan support for certain provisions and the economic benefits they bring to many districts.

China, meanwhile, dominates the global supply chain for solar panels, batteries and critical minerals, while also expanding its nuclear and hydroelectric capacity. The United Kingdom is betting big on offshore wind and small modular reactors, aiming to decarbonise its grid and reduce reliance on imported fuels.

Canada has made its ambitions clear. Prime Minister Mark Carney envisions the country as a leader in both clean and conventional energy, investing in critical minerals, nuclear power and liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports.

Navigating challenges

Each country is navigating its own set of challenges. Canada faces scrutiny over Indigenous rights and environmental protections. The US must overcome political gridlock and aging infrastructure. China’s dominance in critical minerals raises concerns about supply chain security, while the UK grapples with energy affordability and grid modernisation.

What’s clear is that the energy transition is no longer a niche policy issue, it’s a defining global competition. As nations race to lead the energy future, the stakes are high, timelines are tight, and the outcomes will shape the world for generations to come.

Power plays: the geopolitical stakes of the energy race

As countries pour billions into energy infrastructure and innovation, the race to become an energy superpower is reshaping global geopolitics. Energy has always been a lever of influence, controlling supply chains, setting prices and forging strategic alliances. But in today’s landscape, the stakes are higher and the dynamics more complex.

Control over critical minerals

China’s dominance in the mining and processing of critical minerals like lithium, cobalt and rare earth elements gives it outsized influence over the clean energy supply chain. This has prompted the US, EU and Canada to accelerate domestic mining and forge new trade partnerships to reduce dependency. The result is a scramble for resource security that mirrors past oil geopolitics, but with a green twist.

Energy diplomacy and alliances

Energy investments are increasingly tied to foreign policy. The US is using clean energy cooperation to strengthen ties with allies, while China’s Belt and Road Initiative includes energy infrastructure projects that extend its reach across continents. Canada and the UK are also leveraging energy exports and technology partnerships to deepen international relationships and attract investment.

National security and resilience

Energy independence is now a national security priority. The war in Ukraine exposed Europe’s vulnerability to Russian gas, prompting a rapid shift towards renewables and LNG imports from friendlier nations. Countries are rethinking their energy strategies not just for climate goals, but to ensure resilience against geopolitical shocks.

Prediction #1 — The future of IoT-led utility grids

As we move further into the 21st century, the integration of IoT (Internet of Things) into utility grids is set to revolutionise the energy sector. This transformation is not just a technological upgrade, but a strategic shift that will redefine how we generate, distribute and consume energy.

Market growth & adoption trends

The smart grid market is poised for significant growth with the global smart grid market expected to grow from $73.3 billion in 2024 to $269.5 billion by 2033, at a CAGR of 15.6%. IoT in utilities is projected to reach $40.87 billion by the end of 2025, growing at a CAGR of 11.3% through 2033.

This accelerated growth is primarily being driven by:

rising energy demand and electrification;
government initiatives for grid modernisation;
integration of EVs and renewable energy;
need for grid resilience and reduced transmission losses;
demand for real-time monitoring and predictive maintenance;
smart city and home automation initiatives;
regulatory pressure for sustainability and efficiency;
expansion of 5G and cloud computing.

Investment milestones & global leadership

Investment in smart grid technology is accelerating globally with Europe leading in offshore wind and digital grid integration, supported by robust public funding and cross-border projects. India is driving a $38 billion grid enhancement program, targeting 500 GW clean capacity by 2030.

China invested over $625 billion in clean energy in 2024, with $88 billion earmarked for grid and storage in 2025. However, to meet net-zero goals, global grid investment needs to average $600 billion annually through 2030.

Strategic implications for utility leaders

Utility leaders must navigate a complex landscape where microgrids and decentralisation are becoming the norm. Localised energy systems are enhancing resilience and enabling peer-to-peer energy trading, which is a significant departure from traditional centralised grids. This shift requires a holistic approach to end-to-end asset lifecycle management that spans traditional generation, transmission, distribution and decentralised energy resources (DER).

Challenges & opportunities

The road to IoT-led utility grids is fraught with challenges. Policy fragmentation and regulatory uncertainty remain significant barriers in some regions. Workforce shortages in technical and data science roles may also slow implementation. Additionally, cybersecurity is a growing concern as grid operations become increasingly digital.

However, these challenges also present opportunities. For instance, consumer engagement is on the rise, with integrated billing and real-time usage data empowering customers to manage energy more efficiently. AI and IoT are enabling real-time load forecasting, predictive outage prevention and automated diagnostics, making grid operations more efficient and reliable.

AI, IoT & automation: the backbone of smart grids

AI-native operations are expected to be core to daily utility functions by 2030, with up to 70% adoption in developed markets. Utilities are shifting from reactive to proactive operations using edge devices, smart sensors and machine learning algorithms. These technologies enable real-time load forecasting, predictive outage prevention and automated diagnostics.

Key technologies driving transformation

Several key technologies are driving the transformation of utility grids. Grid-edge software and DER integration facilitate decentralised control, predictive maintenance and consumer participation in energy markets. Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) technology is expected to see exponential growth post-2028, allowing electric vehicles to supply energy back to the grid during peak demand. Distribution automation is enabling real-time fault isolation and load balancing, critical for grid reliability and DER integration.

IFS solutions are playing a crucial role in this transformation, providing comprehensive full asset lifecycle management capabilities, predictive maintenance and real-time data analytics, which are essential for optimising grid operations and ensuring reliability.

Conclusion

The future of IoT-led utility grids is clear, but it requires strategic foresight and robust investment. Utility leaders must navigate regulatory uncertainties, workforce shortages and cybersecurity risks while leveraging the opportunities presented by AI, IoT and consumer engagement.

With the right strategies in place, the energy sector can achieve a sustainable, efficient and resilient future.

Prediction #2 — Small modular reactors: the next frontier in clean energy

As the world races towards net-zero emissions, the energy sector faces a daunting challenge. How to replace fossil fuels with scalable, reliable and clean alternatives? Enter small modular reactors (SMRs), compact nuclear power plants designed to deliver firm, carbon-free energy with unprecedented flexibility and safety.

A new dawn for nuclear?

SMRs aren’t just a technological innovation, they’re a strategic pivot. They offer a path to cost-competitive, scalable and clean baseload power, bridging the gap between intermittent renewables and aging fossil infrastructure. With the right mix of policy support, investment and public trust, SMRs could become an essential element of a resilient, decarbonised energy future.

Market momentum & growth forecasts

The global SMR market is projected to grow from $4.1 billion in 2025 to $40–50 billion by 2035, depending on regulatory progress. The International Energy Agency (IEA) projects global installed SMR capacity could reach up to 200 GW by 2050 under the Net Zero Emissions (NZE) scenario.

Policy & investment catalysts

Governments are stepping up with subsidies, tax incentives and streamlined licensing to accelerate SMR deployment. Public–private partnerships are emerging to de-risk investment and build supply chain maturity and big tech is also investing with Amazon, Google and Microsoft exploring SMRs to power their AI data centres with clean, reliable energy.

Challenges to overcome

Despite their promise, SMRs face significant hurdles. High upfront costs and long ROI timelines require innovative funding models. Public perception remains a barrier, with safety concerns and waste management issues. Supply chain immaturity and regulatory complexity also pose challenges.

Technology readiness & deployment scenarios

IoT and SCADA integration provides a digital backbone, enabling real-time monitoring of reactor conditions and asset health, while AI-driven insights forecast equipment failures and optimise maintenance schedules. Project lifecycle management provides end-to-end visibility across engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning phases, enhancing operational efficiency, safety and regulatory compliance for SMR deployments.

Conclusion

SMRs represent a transformative opportunity for the energy sector. With strategic action, investment and technological innovation, they can become a key player in the global energy landscape, driving us towards a sustainable and resilient future.

Prediction #3 — Beneath the surface: the future of geothermal energy generation

In the race towards a clean, resilient energy future, geothermal power is emerging from the shadows. Long overshadowed by solar and wind, geothermal energy is now poised to become a cornerstone of global electricity and heating systems, thanks to technological breakthroughs, policy momentum and a growing appetite for clean, firm power.

The road ahead

Geothermal energy is no longer a niche. It’s a scalable, clean and politically viable solution to the world’s energy challenges. With the right policies, investment and public awareness, it is poised to become a key factor in a resilient, low-carbon grid.

Growth projections & market potential

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), geothermal could technically meet humanity’s electricity needs 140 times over.

Global Geothermal Capacity: The global geothermal capacity reached 15 GW in 2023, with projections to hit 60 GW by 2050 under current policies and 80 GW if pledges are met.
US Geothermal Supply: In the US, next-gen geothermal could supply up to 100 GW by 2050, with 40 GW by 2035.
Heat Production Growth: Heat production for buildings and industry is expected to triple by 2050, with China driving nearly 70% of the growth.

Investment & policy momentum

Over $900 million in private capital has flowed into next-generation geothermal in the past five years. In a rare bipartisan move, the US preserved geothermal tax credits through the mid-2030s, even as solar and wind incentives were slashed.

Google, Chevron and other major players are also backing pilot projects, including Fervo Energy’s record-setting Nevada test that produced 3.5 MW of continuous power for 30 days.

Challenges ahead

Despite its promise, geothermal faces hurdles. High upfront costs, long development timelines and permitting complexity, especially in environmentally sensitive areas, limit investor appetite.

However, costs are falling and McKinsey projects levelised costs could drop to $45–65/MWh over the next decade, driven by drilling efficiencies, better resource mapping and scaled equipment supply chains.

Technology driving the shift

Next-generation technologies like Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) and Advanced Closed-Loop Systems (ACLs) are unlocking geothermal potential in places previously deemed unsuitable. These innovations allow developers to tap heat from deep, dry rock formations, virtually anywhere on earth. Techniques honed during the shale boom, like horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, are now being repurposed to unlock clean energy from deep rock.

Conclusion

Geothermal energy has always held promise. It’s clean, dispatchable and weather-resilient. But until recently, its use was limited to regions with natural hot springs or volcanic activity. That’s changing. Emerging superhot rock EGS systems could deliver exponentially more energy per well, with just 1% of global superhot resources capable of generating 63 terawatts of clean power.

The heat beneath our feet is ready. The question is: are we?

Image credit: iStock.com/AerialPerspective Works

Open EOI released for waste-to-energy procurement process

Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +1100

The City of Gold Coast has launched an international Open Expression of Interest (EOI) to begin the process of identifying experienced partners to design, build, finance, operate and maintain a new residual waste-to-energy facility at Stapylton.

The Open EOI was released this week and will remain open until 30 March, marking a major milestone in the city’s long-term waste and resource recovery strategy as existing landfills approach capacity.

The proposed facility will be located within the Advanced Resource Recovery Centre (ARRC) Precinct at Stapylton, on City of Gold Coast-owned land within the Yatala Enterprise Area, leveraging existing waste infrastructure, strong transport connectivity and appropriate industrial buffers.

“The ARRC Precinct is one of the most ambitious initiatives in our city’s history, turning waste into valuable resources, creating long-term environmental, social and economic benefits for our community and the broader region,” said Acting Gold Coast Mayor Mark Hammel.

“Bringing the ARRC to its full potential will benefit every Gold Coaster including our 80,000 small businesses. Further, it will provide certainty to all South East Queensland region councils and the private sector, given ARRC will lead the way through responsible waste resource management and recycling.

“This tender process will open the next chapter in this exciting project.”

The waste-to-energy facility is planned to process residual municipal solid waste and commercial and industrial waste generated within the Gold Coast, with forecast residual waste volumes of more than 300,000 tonnes per annum by the early 2030s, after accounting for ongoing improvements in recycling.

While the facility’s core role is managing Gold Coast residual waste, it is being planned with scalable capacity to support broader regional waste management needs, subject to future agreements and approvals.

The facility is expected to recover energy from residual waste, generating electricity for use by the city, with output anticipated to be sufficient to power up to 80,000 homes, depending on the final technology solution and approvals.

ARRC Gold Coast Chief Executive Officer Grant Gabriel said the procurement process is designed to attract “world-class” proponents with proven experience in large-scale infrastructure delivery and long-term operations.

“This Open EOI is the first step towards finding the right partners to help deliver a safe, reliable and future-proof solution for residual waste,” Gabriel said.

“The feasibility phase is complete, and we are now progressing the detailed business case and environmental, health and planning approvals alongside procurement to ensure the project is well-positioned for delivery.

“We’ve deliberately structured this as a staged, interactive procurement process so industry can help refine the technical solution, commercial framework and risk allocation as the project moves forward.”

Interested proponents will be able to access the EOI documentation via the City of Gold Coast procurement portal VendorPanel from 17 February–30 March.

The short video below provides an overview of what ARRC Gold Coast is, why it’s needed, and how the project is being delivered in stages, from organics and recycling through to future energy recovery and innovation.

Top image caption: A render of the main view of the Advanced Resource Recovery Centre (ARRC) Precinct at Stapylton. Image supplied by ARRC Gold Coast.

A matter of influence: getting over the 'ick' with recycled water

Fri, 06 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +1100

Many in Australia will remember the public rejection of recycled water by Toowoomba residents in Queensland back in 2006 during the millennium drought, which led to a referendum where they voted in favour of desalination.

Since then, public acceptance of recycled drinking water has been slowly improving, with Western Australia now leading the way in Australia. Purified recycled drinking water was introduced in Perth in 2017 out of necessity as the city has limited dams and the water resources were dwindling.

With growing concern over climate change, supplying water to other large cities across the country is also becoming an increasing challenge. Many of the state’s water utilities have boosted their efforts to try and educate the public with data and facilities that demonstrate the benefits and safety of purified drinking water, but the ‘ick-factor’ still remains ever present.

Now, an international study led by the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC) in Spain has identified a method that could prove key to overcoming consumers’ instinctive resistance to recycled drinking water — using sensory content on social media rather than rational data.

Research led by Professor Inma Rodríguez-Ardura, coordinator of the UOC's Digital Business Research Group (DigiBiz), found that influencers on platforms such as Instagram use sensory and emotional content to build mental images, and that this is more effective than purely rational arguments for overcoming resistance to drinking recycled tap water and encouraging sustainable consumption.

The study, published in the British Food Journal, is based on the experience of 800 Instagram users from Barcelona and Phoenix. The authors also include Professor Antoni Meseguer-Artola and Gisela Ammetller, fellow members of the UOC’s Faculty of Economics and Business.

The research team understood that, while there is a real and urgent need to encourage the consumption of recycled tap water in areas threatened by the climate emergency, the main obstacle to uptake is not its safety, but how it is perceived. Although recycled tap water is safe for human consumption if it has gone through appropriate water treatment systems, when people know that the source is treated and purified waste water, for many their instinctive reactions include rejection, fear and even revulsion. This visceral reaction is compounded by a widespread tendency among consumers to undervalue the supply of tap water, or take it for granted until a supply crisis occurs.

In this context, traditional communication strategies, based predominantly on technical data, scientific presentations and rational arguments about collective savings, are demonstrably insufficient for changing deeply ingrained habits. “Although sustainable water consumption objectively benefits society as a whole in the long term, just communicating this idea is not enough to get consumers’ full engagement,” Rodríguez-Ardura said. This is where influencer marketing comes in. According to the research, this tool helps make abstract benefits like sustainability more tangible, linking them to positive emotions and feelings, aspects that public institutions and supply companies have failed to exploit to date.

The power of mental imagery

The study centres on the concept of mental imagery and how social media, specifically Instagram, can be used to evoke it. The researchers set out to determine how the content created by influencers can generate subjective, transformative and compelling experiences for their followers. Rodríguez-Ardura, who is affiliated to the UOC-DIGIT research centre, explained the importance of this psychological mechanism: “Mental imagery is a subjective experience that involves conjuring up vivid feelings, objects, people or events, even if they did not happen or are not real. It’s a type of feeling we create in our minds that makes things that were perceived as abstract, complex or distant seem tangible, understandable and real.”

The research identifies two dimensions within this phenomenon: elaborated imagery, which the consumer creates voluntarily through cognitive effort (such as calculating how much plastic is saved by drinking tap water), and spontaneous imagery, which arises effortlessly or unconsciously, prompted by a stimulus. For example, a video of an influencer drinking recycled tap water out in the sunshine might automatically evoke mental images of it being refreshing and thirst-quenching, without the need for complex rational processing.

One of the key findings of the study, conducted on a sample of 800 Instagram users between the ages of 18 and 54, is the asymmetric impact of different types of message. Although being informative is important for the formation of mental images, hedonic or sensorial content has a significantly greater impact. “To break down the barriers to sustainable water consumption, it’s not enough to get people to understand that tap water is healthy and safe. It’s also vital to recreate the experience of drinking it as something desirable, refreshing and emotionally satisfying,” Rodríguez-Ardura said.

The study also explores the concept of ‘transportation’, a psychological state of deep immersion in a narrative. The data reveals that mental imagery acts as a powerful antecedent or trigger for this phenomenon, leading the consumer to become so absorbed in the influencer’s story that they lose track of time and feel part of the scene before them on the screen. Facilitating this vicarious experience reduces the capacity for critical thinking and opposition to the message. It fosters an enduring emotional connection that is key to transforming attitudes on sensitive issues, allowing us to experience the benefits of recycled tap water and its sustainable use before we actually taste it.

Implications for future campaigns

The study’s conclusions offer a roadmap for public institutions and bodies responsible for water management. It suggests that campaigns should not be limited to providing information, but should strive as much, if not more, to have hedonic and sensory appeal. If an authority wants to encourage the use of recycled tap water, its strategy should focus on helping the public to visualise and feel its positive properties.

“A public institution that promotes the use of recycled tap water in the urban supply system must focus its strategy on helping consumers to vicariously ‘visualise’ and ‘feel’ the positive properties of the water. This can be achieved, for example, through influencer marketing initiatives focusing on conveying the sensation of drinking, the freshness of the water, or doing healthy activities where drinking water is an emotionally desirable experience,” Rodríguez-Ardura said.

The researchers also believe this communicative approach can be applied to other areas beyond water — such as encouraging people to vaccinate or recycle, or even to combat climate change.

Image credit: iStock.com/courtneyk

How sustainability is shaping network strategy

Thu, 05 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +1100

For Australian enterprises entering 2026 planning cycles, sustainability is no longer sitting alongside network strategy. It’s actively shaping it.

With Australia’s net zero commitments, emerging climate disclosure obligations, and the physical realities of distance, energy costs and regional connectivity challenges, the network has become one of the most decisive levers for reducing environmental impact while enabling growth.

For CIOs, CTOs and sustainability leaders, the question is no longer whether to act, but how intelligently connectivity can be designed, consumed and operated to meet compliance requirements and manage risk.

This is where the next generation of networks, built around Network-as-a-Service (NaaS), flexible yet resilient architectures with AI-driven intelligence, will play a defining role for Australian organisations managing legacy infrastructure, APAC complexity, and the operational realities of remote and regional operations.

1. From efficient infrastructure to intelligent networks

For years, Australian organisations pursued sustainable networking through efficiency gains: lower-power equipment, consolidation and data centre optimisation. That foundation remains critical, but given Australia’s energy costs, geographic dispersal and climate exposure, it’s no longer sufficient to meet emerging reporting obligations or manage operational risk.

In 2026, the biggest sustainability gains will come from intelligent networks that adapt in real time, particularly critical for Australian organisations managing long-haul connectivity and resilience to climate events. AI-driven connectivity can dynamically allocate bandwidth, power down unused capacity, predict demand and route traffic based not only on performance, but on energy efficiency. For boards and sustainability leaders, this represents a shift from discretionary sustainability initiatives to operational and reporting requirements.

Sustainability becomes an outcome of network design decisions being made now, not a separate initiative layered on after deployment.

2. NaaS reshapes consumption and carbon impact

For Australian organisations weighing investment trade-offs, one of the most significant shifts underway is the move away from static, over-provisioned legacy networks towards on-demand, consumption-based connectivity. This is a shift that addresses both capital efficiency and carbon impact.

NaaS mirrors what cloud did for compute: organisations no longer build for peak demand ‘just in case’. Instead, they scale up and down as needed, reducing idle capacity, unnecessary hardware and embedded emissions.

In 2026, NaaS becomes not just a commercial or operational choice, but a compliance and risk management tool, particularly for Australian organisations with disclosure obligations and boards demanding defensible carbon reporting alongside network resilience.

3. NaaS architectures reduce digital sprawl

Australian organisations managing APAC operations, regional and remote sites, and long-haul connectivity often still operate fragmented networks stitched together over time. This is a legacy that creates operational, financial and environmental costs that are increasingly difficult to defend to boards and auditors.

A unified global network simplifies connectivity across locations, clouds and partners. With fewer layers, organisations will be able to define ‘flight paths’ for the workloads in transit, optimise network routes, and reduce retransmissions, duplication and data shuffling.

The more integrated the network, the easier it becomes to measure, optimise and ultimately reduce its environmental footprint, and the stronger the foundation for defensible reporting and governance assurance.

4. AI is a sustainability multiplier and a test of responsibility

In 2026, AI has become central to enterprise strategy. However, for Australian organisations facing high energy costs and disclosure requirements, AI infrastructure decisions also carry material carbon and reporting implications.

This creates a clear governance question for CTOs and boards: how do we scale AI while managing energy risk, meeting compliance obligations and producing defensible carbon accounting?

Part of the answer lies in the network. AI-enabled networks can enable organisations to implement green routes by directing traffic to utilise renewable energy sources and energy-efficient infrastructure.

Organisations that design network connectivity with energy awareness built in, rather than bolted on later, will be better positioned to meet reporting requirements and demonstrate AI infrastructure responsibility. The network becomes a tool for governance and transparency, not merely a transport layer.

5. Carbon visibility becomes operational, not just reported

With Australian climate disclosure obligations taking effect, sustainability reporting is no longer optional or annual. It is becoming an operational requirement. In 2026, boards and sustainability leaders will expect granular, auditable insight into network energy use and emissions, alongside traditional metrics such as latency and resilience.

Carbon transparency — granular visibility into network energy use and emissions — becomes a tool for governance, enabling more defensible trade-offs in network strategy decisions: performance versus energy use, resilience versus footprint, investment priorities versus compliance requirements. Networks that can surface these insights provide the foundation for assurance, helping Australian organisations move from retrospective reporting to active risk management and demonstrable carbon reduction.

Image credit: iStock.com/WANAN YOSSINGKUM

F-Gas Regulation: Turning necessity into opportunity

Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +1100

The tightening of the F-Gas Regulation is creating uncertainty across many industries. Deadlines are approaching, and the question of the right refrigerant strategy is becoming increasingly urgent. What may initially appear to be a regulatory burden also represents a strategic opportunity — for greater efficiency, lower operating costs and long-term investment security.

As a leading specialist in thermal management, technotrans has been supplying cooling and temperature control solutions using natural refrigerants to customers for many years. Drawing on this experience, the company demonstrates how businesses can successfully manage the transition and turn regulatory necessity into a clear competitive advantage.

The era of synthetic refrigerants is coming to an end. EU Regulation 2024/573, which entered into force in March 2024, significantly tightens the rules governing fluorinated greenhouse gases (F-gases) and requires system operators to take action. A key element is the so-called “phase-down”, which will gradually reduce the available quantities of partially fluorinated hydrocarbons (HFCs) to zero by 2050.

For industrial companies, this already has tangible implications. From a legal perspective, existing systems containing F-gases may continue to be operated and serviced. However, the phase-down is leading to increasing scarcity of service refrigerants such as R134a or R407C. This inevitably results in rising prices and potential supply bottlenecks. As a consequence, reliable life-cycle cost planning for existing installations becomes more difficult. Maintenance and servicing costs for legacy systems are therefore turning into a volatile cost factor.

At the same time, the regulation sets clear deadlines for placing new systems on the market. From 2027 onwards, strict GWP limits will apply to many applications. The Global Warming Potential (GWP) indicates the extent to which a refrigerant contributes to global warming compared with carbon dioxide (CO₂), which serves as the reference with a GWP value of 1. The higher the GWP value, the greater the environmental impact in the event of a release into the atmosphere. From 2032, a far-reaching ban on most F-gases will follow. Regulatory pressure is also increasing internationally, for example through the AIM Act in the United States.

“The current F-Gas Regulation creates an irreversible reality,” explained Karsten Revers, Head of Engineering at technotrans SE. “Many of our customers are looking for a long-term, reliable solution that will not be affected by further regulatory changes within just a few years. This is precisely where natural refrigerants provide the planning and investment security required.”

Future-proof solutions with natural refrigerants

Among the available natural refrigerants, propane (R290) has established itself as a highly efficient and sustainable solution for industrial thermal management systems. The favourable thermodynamic properties of hydrocarbons such as propane include high specific cooling capacity and efficiency. Independent scientific studies show that modern systems optimised for R290 can achieve an approximately 20% higher coefficient of performance (COP).

In practical operation, variable-speed R290 systems deliver significant energy savings and noticeably reduce operating costs. This economic advantage is further enhanced by attractive public funding schemes. In Germany, for example, the Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA) provides funding exclusively for investments in refrigeration systems using non-halogenated, natural refrigerants.

“For many companies, subsidies are a decisive factor that makes investment even more attractive. That is why we actively support our customers and reduce entry barriers through targeted consulting,” Revers said.

Another key advantage is long-term security. With a GWP value of 0.02, R290 is exempt from the F-Gas Regulation. Investing in a system using this refrigerant therefore offers a high level of planning and legal certainty throughout the entire system life cycle. At the same time, users significantly reduce their carbon footprint. From a safety perspective, the use of R290 is also unproblematic. Modern system designs featuring hermetically sealed refrigerant circuits, minimal refrigerant charges and integrated safety sensors effectively minimise potential risks.

Clear installation rules and proven safety concepts

Installation follows clear and straightforward rules. For preferred outdoor installation, only defined safety distances from building openings (windows, doors, ventilation inlets) and potential ignition sources must be maintained. For indoor installation, the decisive criterion is that, in the event of a leak, the refrigerant concentration in the room air remains well below the lower flammability limit (LFL). This is ensured by maintaining an appropriate ratio between refrigerant charge and room volume.

“Safety is a central concern for our customers,” Revers added. “That is why our safety concept does not end with the machine itself. We support installation and operation with comprehensive training and individual support. This builds confidence and ensures safe handling of natural refrigerants in demanding industrial environments.”

Proven systems in operation for many years

As one of the first manufacturers worldwide, technotrans introduced series-produced thermal management solutions using R290 in the early 2020s and has since been systematically converting its product portfolio.

“From our day-to-day collaboration with customers, we know that the transition is far more than a purely technical decision. Our sales teams provide holistic support — from needs analysis and customised system solutions through to commissioning and service,” Revers emphasised.

Many years of practical experience show that investments in R290 technology often pay for themselves within a short period of time thanks to energy savings and available funding.

“This turns regulatory necessity into a genuine competitive opportunity,” Revers said.

Today, technotrans solutions are used across numerous industries including plastics processing, printing and laser technology, as well as medical technology. Depending on cooling requirements, systems range from compact, integrable OEM assemblies to high-performance central container systems in the megawatt range.

Scalable solutions for diverse requirements

The breadth of the technotrans portfolio demonstrates how flexibly R290 technology can be scaled to meet a wide variety of requirements. Units in the modular ECOtec.chiller xtend series, for example, offer high power density and can be expanded flexibly. They are ideally suited for supplying entire production halls and provide additional efficiency benefits through options such as free cooling and heat recovery. technotrans also offers R290-based heat pumps for heat recovery applications.

The PRO300.chiller, by contrast, is specifically designed for integration into OEM systems. In a compact 19-inch slide-in format, it delivers precise temperature control for highly sensitive applications such as lasers, analytical equipment and medical systems. The p1000 series is even more compact and is based on advanced miniature compressor technology. This provides high cooling capacity within the smallest possible footprint. These highly integrable OEM assemblies demonstrate that the advantages of R290 can also be leveraged for small, decentralised and mobile applications.

With these proven solutions and a global service network, technotrans offers companies the security they need not only to master technological transformation, but also to generate tangible added value.

Outlook: digitalisation and sustainability remain key factors

Future thermal management will become increasingly digital, modular and energy-efficient. Intelligent control systems enable proactive system monitoring and optimisation of operating parameters, reducing both energy consumption and the risk of downtime. At the same time, heat recovery and hybrid energy concepts are gaining importance in supporting sustainable production processes holistically.

technotrans is already developing scalable solutions with integrated monitoring today, ensuring that customers will continue to benefit from reliable, resource-efficient thermal management systems in the future — and actively shaping the path towards a more climate-friendly industry.

For further information, visit the technotrans website.

Image caption: technotrans is consistently expanding the use of natural refrigerants in its energy-efficient teco si series temperature control units.