‘Change course now’: humanity has missed 1.5C climate target, says UN head - The Guardian

The Guardian - Jonathan Watts Wajã Xipai

Exclusive: ‘Devastating consequences’ now inevitable
but emissions cuts still vital 
says António Guterres in sole interview before Cop30

A flooded village in the low-lying island nation of Kiribati. The UN secretary general says Indigenous communities
must be better represented at Cop climate summits. Photograph: Jonas Gratzer/LightRocket/Getty Images

Humanity has failed to limit global heating to 1.5C and must change course immediately, the secretary general of the UN has warned.

In his only interview before next month’s Cop30 climate summit, António Guterres acknowledged it is now “inevitable” that humanity will overshoot the target in the Paris climate agreement, with “devastating consequences” for the world.

He urged the leaders who will gather in the Brazilian rainforest city of Belém to realise that the longer they delay cutting emissions, the greater the danger of passing catastrophic “tipping points” in the Amazon, the Arctic and the oceans.

UN chief António Guterres: 'We don't want to see the Amazon become a savannah' - video

“Let’s recognise our failure,” he told the Guardian and Amazon-based news organisation Sumaúma. “The truth is that we have failed to avoid an overshooting above 1.5C in the next few years. And that going above 1.5C has devastating consequences. Some of these devastating consequences are tipping points, be it in the Amazon, be it in Greenland, or western Antarctica or the coral reefs.

He said the priority at Cop30 was to shift direction: “It is absolutely indispensable to change course in order to make sure that the overshoot is as short as possible and as low in intensity as possible to avoid tipping points like the Amazon. We don’t want to see the Amazon as a savannah. But that is a real risk if we don’t change course and if we don’t make a dramatic decrease of emissions as soon as possible.”

The planet’s past 10 years have been the hottest in recorded history. Despite growing scientific alarm at the speed of global temperature increases caused by the burning of fossil fuels – oil, coal and gas – the secretary general said government commitments have come up short.

Fewer than a third of the world’s nations (62 out of 197) have sent in their climate action plans, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris agreement. The US under Donald Trump has abandoned the process. Europe has promised but so far failed to deliver. China, the world’s biggest emitter, has been accused of undercommitting.

António Guterres giving his speech at Cop29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November 2024.
Photograph: Anatoly Maltsev/EPA

Guterres said the lack of NDC ambition means the Paris goal of 1.5C will be breached, at least temporarily: “From those [NDCs] received until now, there is an expectation of a reduction of emissions of 10%. We would need 60% [to stay within 1.5C]. So overshooting is now inevitable.”

He did not give up on the target though, and said it may still be possible to temporarily overshoot and then bring temperatures down in time to return to 1.5C by the end of the century, but this would require a change of direction at and beyond Cop30.

He called for governments to rebalance representation at Cops so that civil society groups, particularly from Indigenous communities, will have a greater presence and influence than people paid by corporations.

“We all know what the lobbyists want,” he said. “It’s to increase their profits, with the price being paid by humankind.”

He said a transition away from fossil fuels was a matter of economic self-interest, because it was clear that the era of fossil fuels was coming to an end: “We are seeing a renewables revolution and the transition will inevitably accelerate and there will be no way in which humankind will be able to use all the oil and gas already discovered,” he said.

Asked if he had raised this with the Brazilian president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, whose government has just given the green light for oil exploration near the mouth of the Amazon, he said: “Not yet. I’ll take advantage of the Cop [to do this].”

One of Brazil’s initiatives at Cop30 will be the Tropical Forests Forever Facility, which aims to raise $125bn for the protection of standing forests. A fifth of any money disbursed will go directly to Indigenous communities, whose territories contain most of the best-preserved biodiversity and most effective carbon sinks.

On several occasions, Guterres stressed the essential importance of Indigenous voices at Cop30. The UN said this was the first time the secretary general had given an exclusive interview to a journalist from an Indigenous community, Wajã Xipai, a Sumaúma reporter from the Xipai people who was joined by the Guardian.

“It is fundamental to invest in those who are the best guardians of nature. And the best guardians of nature are precisely the Indigenous communities,” Guterres said.

World leaders should also be schooled by Indigenous peoples in how to achieve a balance with nature, the secretary general said. 

“Political leaders are often more concerned with the day-to-day problems of society, especially at times when the economic situation is complex and aggravated by climate change, by disasters, by catastrophes. So sometimes there is no notion of the importance of a harmonious relationship with nature and therefore it is necessary to permanently maintain a pedagogy with the political leaders, and there is no one better than the Indigenous communities to do this pedagogy,” he said

Despite growing pressure on the Cop system of global environmental governance, Guterres said it played a crucial role.

“The alternative is a free-for-all,” he said. “And we know what free for all means. Free for all means that there will be a small privileged elite, people and companies that will be able to always protect themselves, even if disasters will spread. Floods will spread, communities will be destroyed, but there will always be a group of rich people and rich companies that will be able to protect themselves as the planet is being progressively destroyed.”

Next year will be Guterres’s last as secretary general. Looking back on his nine years in the post, he said he wished he had focused on climate and nature earlier, though it was now a priority. 

He said: “I will never give up on my commitment to climate action, on my commitment to biodiversity, on my commitment to the protection of nature, on my commitment to help and support all the democratic movements that around the world are fighting and fighting hard to preserve the most precious possession that we have, which is our mother nature.”

Links 

• World enters ‘new era’ of climate action – but progress must accelerate
• In Southeast Asia, Guterres presses the case for climate action
  
• Most countries fail to submit new climate pledges ahead of summit
  
• "Governments do not have the ambition": inaction slammed as global heating passes key mark
  
• Surging seas are coming for us all, warns UN chief
  
• Climate science and early warnings key to saving lives
  
• UN chief says world has overshot climate warming threshold

A Planet Under Pressure: New Data Shows the Climate Emergency Deepening in 2025 - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

September 2025 ranked the third-warmest on record globally for both land and sea surface temperatures. [1] Temperatures are expected to remain at or near record levels for the next five years, with a substantial chance of exceeding 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. [2] New national climate plans (NDCs) show emissions may begin to decline over the coming decade but still fall far short of what is needed to hit the 1.5 °C target. [3] Only about one-third of national climate pledges explicitly support a transition away from fossil fuels. [4] Australia’s 2035 climate target has drawn criticism as being insufficient despite new ambitions. [5] The world remains “off-track” to meet the 2035 emissions reductions required under the Paris Agreement pathway for 1.5 °C. [6]

Global temperatures continue to rise, and the planet faces an urgent climate crisis.

September 2025 ranked as the third-warmest month globally for land and ocean surface temperatures. ^[1]

Greenhouse-gas accumulation continues to drive unusual heat patterns worldwide. ^[1]

Sea-surface temperatures remain near record highs, stressing marine ecosystems. ^[1]

Long-term forecasts predict that global temperatures between 2025 and 2029 will likely exceed 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. ^[2]

There is a high probability that at least one year in the next five will set new temperature records. ^[2]

National climate plans show the potential for declining emissions, but current commitments fall far short of limiting warming to 1.5 °C. ^[3]

Only a third of countries explicitly support a shift away from fossil fuels in their pledges. ^[4]

The Paris Agreement goals remain at risk unless stronger and faster action is taken globally. ^[6]

These trends underline the urgency for governments, industry, and civil society to accelerate mitigation and adaptation measures worldwide. ^[6]

Humanity has entered a high-stakes decade where delayed action could lock in devastating warming and irreversible climate impacts. ^[2]

Global Temperatures: A Stark Signal

September 2025 was the third-warmest September on record, with both land and sea surface temperatures continuing at unusually high levels, according to recent data. ^[1]

The Copernicus Climate Change Service reports that global surface air temperatures for September were approximately 0.66 °C above the 1991–2020 monthly average and about 1.47 °C above the 1850–1900 pre-industrial baseline. ^[1]

Sea-surface temperatures averaged near 20.72 °C for the month, ranking among the highest ever recorded for September and reflecting widespread marine heat stress. ^[1]

These persistently high temperatures across both land and ocean point to the continuing influence of greenhouse-gas accumulation in the atmosphere. ^[1]

Warming oceans can fuel marine heatwaves, reduce carbon absorption and amplify extreme weather risks. ^[1]

Outlook For The Next Five Years

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) projects that average global temperatures between 2025 and 2029 are likely to be 1.2–1.9 °C above the 1850–1900 baseline. ^[2]

There is an 80 % chance that at least one year in that period will exceed the warmest year on record so far, and an 86 % chance that one year will exceed 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. ^[2]

The WMO notes a roughly 70 % chance that the five-year average warming over 2025–29 will exceed 1.5 °C. ^[2]

While the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 °C limit refers to multi-decadal averages, these forecasts show the narrowing window for keeping warming below that threshold. ^[2]

Arctic regions continue to warm much faster than the global average, increasing risks of ice melt, sea-level rise and permafrost thaw. ^[2]

National Climate Plans: Progress, But Insufficient

The latest UNFCCC assessment shows that if countries meet their current climate plans, global emissions may start to decline this decade—for the first time in modern history. ^[3]

Emissions could fall around 10 % by 2035 compared with 2019 levels, but that remains far short of the 60 % reduction needed to limit warming to 1.5 °C. ^[3]

Only one-third of national climate plans explicitly commit to a transition away from fossil fuels. ^[4]

Some countries are still expanding fossil-fuel production, locking in long-lived carbon-intensive infrastructure. ^[4]

Australia’s Position & Global Implications

Australia’s proposed 2035 target aims for a 62–70 % reduction in emissions from 2005 levels, but experts warn this ambition may be insufficient. ^[5]

Critics argue Australia lacks a defined renewables share target despite projections showing over 90 % renewables may be required. ^[5]

Many major economies are similarly delaying or weakening mid-century climate targets, heightening risks of stranded assets and delayed adaptation. ^[6]

Impacts & Amplifying Risks

High global temperatures are driving more frequent and severe heatwaves, droughts, floods and coral bleaching events. ^[1]

Marine heatwaves are stressing ocean ecosystems and reducing the ocean’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide. ^[1]

Climate models warn that each additional degree of warming increases the risk of triggering major tipping points such as ice-sheet collapse or permafrost thaw. ^[2]

What Needs To Happen Now

Countries must not only update their commitments but implement them rapidly across energy, transport, land and industry sectors. ^[3]

Accelerating investment in renewable energy, electrification, energy efficiency and storage will be critical. ^[4]

Adaptation must also scale up to protect vulnerable populations, infrastructure and ecosystems. ^[1]

Whether the 2020s become a turning point or a lost decade will depend on global cooperation and domestic follow-through. ^[6]

Conclusion

September’s record-level heat and multi-year forecasts of sustained warming underline that the world remains off-track. ^{[1] [2] [3]}

In Australia and beyond, raising ambition and embedding delivery into policy are essential. ^{[5] [6]}

The message from scientists and agencies is clear: the signals are flashing red, and the time for action is now.

References

1. September Sees Persistently High Land and Sea Surface Temperatures Globally
2. Global Climate Predictions Show Temperatures Expected to Remain at or Near Record Levels in the Next Five Years
3. Countries’ New Climate Plans to Start Cutting Global Emissions, UN Says
4. Only a Third of National Climate Pledges Support Transition Away from Fossil Fuels
5. Australia’s 2035 Climate Target Will Strike a Middle Path: Will It Be Sufficient?
6. Nations Must Close Huge Emissions Gap in New Climate Pledges and Deliver Immediate Action, or 1.5 °C Lost

Back to Top

Has climate policy peaked? The rise and fall of a political cause - The Mandarin

The Mandarin - David Stadelmann    Benno Torgler

Big promises are fading.
Adaptation, proven tech, and smarter climate change policies
are taking centre stage in Australia.

Environment Minister Murray Watt. (AAP Image/Fraser Barton)

Authors David Stadelmann is a professor of economics at the University of Bayreuth, Germany; a senior fellow at the Institute for Swiss Economic Policy; a fellow at the Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts; a fellow at the ARC Training Centre for Behavioural Insights for Technology Adoption; a fellow at the Ostrom Workshop, Indiana University; and a member of the Walter Eucken Institute.  Benno Torgler is a professor of economics at the School of Economics and Finance, QUT, and the Director of the ARC Training Centre for Behavioural Insights for Technology Adoption. He is also a senior fellow at the Institute for Swiss Economic Policy, a fellow at the Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts, and a fellow of the CESifo Research Network and the Global Labor Organization.

Australia has long been a proving ground for climate policy.

Governments have announced ambitious targets, introduced complex regulatory schemes, and committed substantial subsidies to renewable energy. Outcomes, however, are mixed. 

Australia remains one of the world’s largest coal exporters. Although coal-fired generation is declining, the pace of the transition to wind, solar, and storage has been slower than anticipated, and the rollout of electricity generation and transmission infrastructure is struggling to meet the 2030 target.

Debates intensified with the release of the National Climate Risk Assessment in 2025, presented as a sober appraisal of future risks. 

However, critics argued that the report relies on implausible scenarios of runaway coal use and global population growth, citing disaster cost projections attributed to climate change, even though an underlying review links rising losses primarily to increased population and property exposure rather than Australian CO₂ emissions. 

Such framing may generate headlines but risks undermining credibility and the international collaboration that effective climate policy would require.

Climate protection is the textbook case of a global public good: non-rivalry and non-excludability create strong incentives to free ride, leading to suboptimal collective outcomes. 

Unilateral Australian policies and actions have negligible direct effects on global temperatures; their value rests largely on demonstration, technology development, and diplomatic leverage rather than on measurable climate impacts per se. 

Countries and individuals who cut emissions bear the costs themselves, while the benefits are distributed worldwide. The incentives for any one country to act independently and substantially are therefore weak. Citizens care less about the global average temperature than about the local consequences — what they experience in their own environment.

Although international agreements could, in theory, solve this dilemma, in practice, they have so far failed to deliver fully. Many signatory states are authoritarian or unwilling to implement costly treaties. Democratic countries also retreat when domestic costs bite, as the United States did when it temporarily withdrew from the Paris Agreement under President Trump.

Behavioural and political economy considerations

There is evidence that 'peak climate policy' may already have passed in many jurisdictions, and Australia may not be an exception. A behavioural economics and political economy lens helps explain why enthusiasm is cooling after years of moralised rhetoric about existential risk. Governments and voters now confront high fiscal costs, limited near-term climate benefits, and costly economic distortions created by complex policy instruments. 

As competing priorities — defence, pensions, infrastructure — press on limited budgets, grand narratives are giving way to more modest, pragmatic debate. Two questions follow: how climate policy rose to public prominence, and why doubts are now growing.

How climate policy rose to the top

Until recently, climate protection dominated public discourse around the world and particularly in Europe. National politicians and representatives of the United Nations warned of an 'existential threat' and 'the greatest challenge in human history'. Yet, despite the warnings and massive climate protests, fossil fuel use, global greenhouse gas emissions, and average temperatures continue to rise. By contrast, climate protests have dwindled, if not disappeared; only media attention to 'climate catastrophes' has not yet waned.

In the 1990s, it seemed unlikely that climate protection would become a guiding political theme. Reducing CO₂ emissions and other greenhouse gases imposes immediate costs, while the benefits are distant and uncertain. Politics and society generally prefer the opposite: benefits first, costs later. Despite these obstacles, climate protection became a dominant political cause, influencing elections and mobilising the streets. 

Modern politics, combined with behavioural economics, helps explain why: the harder a problem is to solve and the longer it persists, the more it lends itself to being a political and moral topic. Thus, climate protection became a business and climate change offered opportunities for spending, regulation and posture, with limited accountability for results. Six mechanisms were central.

1. Expressive behaviour. Because one nation’s contribution to emissions hardly matters for climate change, the effectiveness of its emissions reduction policies is almost irrelevant. Public discourse thus revolved not around efficiency but around climate change as a moral issue. Governments pledged long-term 'net zero' targets decades away, while the true costs would fall on future administrations. 
   Symbolism, not substance, often dominated. In Australia, periodic ratcheting of targets fits this pattern. The latest goal — cutting emissions by 62–70% below 2005 levels by 2035 — may prove overly ambitious. Emissions are currently about 28% below 2005 levels, with only modest progress in recent years. Critical assessments have followed.
2. Beneficiaries in politics. Politicians who championed climate policy early gained moral authority and media dominance. Criticism was often dismissed as immoral or 'anti-science', even though it was clear from the start that climate protection could only work globally, not merely nationally. At the same time, subsidies and levies expanded government revenue and offered room for patronage. Climate protection became a platform for redistribution and client politics.
3. New sources of money. Early climate measures and promises created immediate business opportunities. It is estimated that the electricity sector would require substantial capital investment to cover essential electricity infrastructure by 2050. Subsidies for wind and solar, along with government contracts, fuelled new industries that profited from the money. 
   Other companies thrived on selling 'sustainable' products, consulting and certification services. Australia’s renewable energy subsidies have produced fortunes for a few, while leaving ordinary households with mounting bills.
4. Bureaucracy loves regulation. Each new climate initiative generated tasks for departments, agencies and regulators. As mandates and compliance regimes multiplied, Australia’s dual layers of Commonwealth and state authority made duplication and jurisdictional overlap more likely, driving up administrative complexity and costs.
5. Scapegoating. Climate change provided a convenient excuse for national policy failures. Following floods or bushfires, leaders often face pressure to 'do something', a classic action bias in behavioural economics, and the attribution question — 'was this climate change?' — can crowd out harder discussions about planning, land use and hazard management. In Australia, national leaders faced backlash during the 2019 bushfire crisis for declining to engage substantively with climate questions.
6. Passing on costs. Climate-related regulations raised costs for companies, but because their competitors nationally and in several Western countries faced similar regulations, those costs were often passed on to consumers. In some cases, firms profited. Australia’s Safeguard Mechanism and renewable obligations can produce analogous dynamics where consumers shoulder costs and industries find ways to profit.

The turn: Why climate policy is losing steam

Now, however, the underlying economic logic is reasserting itself: genuine climate protection to reduce global warming would require effective global cooperation. But this global cooperation has failed to materialise in practice, even though many climate treaties have been signed and numerous climate conferences have been held. 

After years of political grandstanding, ambitious policy targets, and vast amounts of subsidies, the climate issue is now losing its appeal. Six developments explain why 'peak climate policy' has likely already passed.

1. The return to cost-benefit realism. More than 30 years after the Kyoto Protocol, politically set climate targets are drawing nearer, and the costs of compliance are rising rapidly. Moralising slogans are giving way to more sober cost-benefit analysis. Many citizens are noticing how inefficient and expensive past strategies have been and how little they have contributed to slowing climate change.
2. Competition from other pressing issues. As the climate discourse loses its 'monopoly' in public debate, other priorities take centre stage: ageing populations, pension security, and defence spending in an unstable geopolitical world. In Australia, billions for renewable subsidies will compete with other funding such as defence. The war in Ukraine has shifted political and public opinion to view defence as, in the short run, a larger priority than climate change.
3. Everything is relative. Climate damages can look frightening in absolute terms. But relative to growing economic output, they are relatively modest. Sound economic policy that generates decent growth rates has the potential to offset much of the negative impact of climate change. Recent evidence reports an environmental-Kuznets-type pattern: as incomes rise, environmental pressures tend to intensify initially and then diminish.
4. A change of perspective. Knowledge about climate change and climate science has advanced. People recognise that the 1.5°C 'target' of the Paris Agreement is increasingly difficult; it has always been challenging from a socio-economic perspective. They also understand that today’s especially rich societies have far greater capacity to cope with change than in 1850.
5. Adaptation instead of prevention. Since large-scale global emissions cuts remain unlikely in the near future, adaptation is moving to the forefront of the debate. Unlike distant promises of prevention, adaptation delivers immediate, tangible benefits. Investments in infrastructure, cooling technologies, water management, and urban design are visible, practical, and often cost effective. 
   In Australia, measures such as risk-appropriate zoning, fuel management, and improved land use likely deliver greater near-term payoff than symbolic targets.
6. Climate technologies. New approaches, such as carbon removal or geo-engineering (for example, enhanced weathering), are drawing growing attention. Their complexity brings 'known unknowns', such as potential effects on the global water cycle and other Earth-system feedbacks, but support for model-based research and robust governance frameworks is increasing. 
   Politically, the prospect of technological breakthroughs can be attractive because it signals progress without immediate economy-wide sacrifices.

Toward rational policy

Thus, global climate protection, until recently cast as humanity’s defining task, is increasingly giving way to approaches that are more realistic, tangible, and enforceable. The key question is whether a better economic design is available.

The answer proposed is efficient cost transparency. Every country could adopt a universal CO₂ price. Such a mechanism would create the right incentives for producers and consumers without relying on subsidies, mandates, or complex regulations. Revenues could be returned to citizens, for example via tax reductions on labour or consumption. 

This approach would be more efficient and more socially acceptable. The burden of a universal carbon price would be far lower than today’s labyrinth of subsidies and levies. Internationally, a simple and universal mechanism offers the best chance for effective cooperation.

Yet a CO₂ price that displaces subsidies and regulations deprives politicians, bureaucrats, and favoured industries of their privileges. The welfare-enhancing path remains blocked — not by economic logic, but by political incentives.

A mature approach

Climate change is real. But the politics of climate change — often marked by apocalyptic rhetoric, moral posturing, and costly symbolism — appears to have peaked. The experiences show both zeal and flaws: contested projections, generous subsidies, and rising household costs. Around the world, voters are beginning to ask harder questions, weighing real trade-offs, and prioritising issues closer to home.

What lies ahead is not the end of climate policy, but its transformation: fewer exaggerations and grand promises, more emphasis on adaptation and proven technologies, and potentially a shift toward economic and behavioural rationality via transparent, economy-wide pricing of emissions. 

Welcoming this shift is not cynicism; it is policy maturity — the recognition that effective climate action is less about headlines and more about solving problems efficiently, transparently and fairly.

Links

• Climate turning point
• Reinvestigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) of carbon emissions and ecological footprint in 147 countries: a matter of trade protectionism
• Air Conditioning Usage by Country 2025
• Australia’s 2035 climate target is coming. Here’s how we’ll know if it’s good enough

• Australia's first National Climate Risk Assessment
• What happened to the youth climate movement?
• No room for the timid: setting Australia’s 2035 emissions target is a daring tightrope act
• Transport will make or break Australia’s new climate plan – and time is running out to fix it
• Is climate change to blame for Australia's bushfires?

Back to top

Australia’s Climate Crossroads: Building a Just and Resilient Future - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Australia must pair decarbonisation with adaptation to build resilience across ecologies and communities[1] The economic transition must protect jobs and regions reliant on high-emission industries[2] Vulnerable and Indigenous communities require tailored support and culturally safe decision-making[3] Ecological systems need legal reform, nature-positive targets and stronger biodiversity protection[4] Political and community engagement are essential to ensure legitimacy and equitable outcomes[5] Australia’s global standing depends on aligning climate policy with credible targets, law reform and regional leadership[6]

Australia stands at a pivotal moment to adapt to and mitigate worsening climate impacts while transforming its economy and protecting its people.

The nation must respond to intensifying climate change by simultaneously managing risks, cutting emissions and ensuring no community is left behind.^[1]

Australia's economic structure needs to shift away from fossil-fuel dependence towards clean industries while safeguarding jobs and regional economies.^[2]

Communities most vulnerable, particularly Indigenous peoples and those in remote or low-income areas, must be central to adaptation planning and support.^[3]

Australia’s unique ecology and biodiversity face severe strain from climate stress and require legal and institutional reform to bolster protection.^[4]

Cultural impacts, from loss of Indigenous heritage to community disruption, must be addressed through inclusive policy and law reform.^[3]

Broad political debate and genuine community action are critical for legitimacy, fairness, and effective implementation of climate strategies.^[5]

Laws need reform to embed nature-positive goals, strengthen climate accountability, and foster equitable outcomes.^[4]

Australia’s global standing depends on aligning climate ambitions with credible targets, regional partnerships, and leadership in clean growth.^[6]

The path ahead demands an integrated, just, and multi-layered strategy spanning economy, society, ecology, culture, and governance.

1. Transitioning the Economy

Australia is committed to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions by 43 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and reaching net-zero by 2050.^[2]

The federal budget outlines multi-billion-dollar investments in clean energy infrastructure, electrification, and industrial transformation to support this shift.^[2]

A successful transition will require retraining programs, regional economic diversification, and support for communities currently dependent on coal, gas, and high-emission industries.

Equally, adaptation investments for infrastructure, resilient design, and risk management must go in parallel with mitigation measures to avoid locking vulnerable sectors into future hardship.^[1]

This dual strategy ensures the economy can both adapt to inevitable climate impacts and create new growth in emerging green industries.

2. Protecting Vulnerable Communities

The health, well-being, and livelihoods of Australians are already under pressure from heatwaves, floods, bushfires, and droughts linked to climate change.^[3]

Australia’s national adaptation framework emphasises social, economic, and built and natural domains, and recognises that adaptation is a shared responsibility across governments, businesses, and communities.^[5]

Indigenous peoples face disproportionate risks due to historical, cultural, and geographic factors and require governance models aligned with their own values and knowledge systems.^[7]

To protect the most vulnerable, policy must include targeted funding, insurance reform, climate risk disclosure, home upgrades for low-income households, and equitable infrastructure planning.^[5]

Without such tailored actions, adaptation may reinforce existing social inequalities rather than improving them.

3. Safeguarding Ecology

The latest assessment of Australia shows ecosystems have already crossed critical thresholds of irreversible harm in some cases and that biodiversity loss is accelerating.^[7]

Ecological resilience depends on restoring healthy habitat, managing invasive species, protecting water systems, and embedding nature-positive targets in law and policy.^[4]

Reforming key legislation such as the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, strengthening land-use regulation and establishing mandatory biodiversity targets will be essential for effective mitigation and adaptation strategies.^[4]

Nature-based solutions, such as restoring wetlands, regenerating forests, and re-establishing Indigenous land-care practices, can isolate carbon and build ecological resilience.^[7]

Australia must align its ecological protection with its emissions reduction and adaptation frameworks to ensure the natural systems that support human and cultural well-being are preserved.^[1]

4. Cultural Impacts and Indigenous Leadership

Climate change threatens cultural heritage, Indigenous knowledge systems and the connection of First Nations peoples to land, sea and community.^[7]

The IPCC notes that for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples of Australia, climate change worsens longstanding inequalities and impacts cultural well-being and governance networks.^[7]

Policies must incorporate Indigenous leadership, co-design of adaptation programs, recognise ongoing custodianship and safe participation in decision-making.^[3]

Cultural resilience is intertwined with ecological and social resilience and cannot be treated as an optional extra in climate strategy.^[7]

Failure to integrate cultural perspectives risks eroding rights, identity, and long-term community stability.^[7]

5. Political Debate and Community Action

Effective climate action relies on democratic legitimacy, informed public debate, and widespread community engagement.^[5]

Yet recent analysis shows adaptation is undervalued in electoral discussion and suffers from institutional inertia and short-termism.^[5]

To bolster legitimacy, governments must provide transparent risk assessments, decentralised decision-making, local community funding, and structured opportunities for civic participation.^[1]

Community-led initiatives, from local renewable cooperatives to neighbourhood resilience hubs, give practical meaning to adaptation and mitigation policy.^[5]

Encouraging grassroots action not only builds resilience but also helps embed climate literacy and social cohesion essential for fair transitions.^[1]

6. Law Reform, Governance and Global Standing

Australia has recently adopted the Climate Change Act 2022 which sets out binding emissions targets, annual climate statements and a legislative basis for oversight and future review.^[4]

The federal government’s adaptation strategy outlines seven systems, including economy, infrastructure, natural environment, health, communities, food, and security, to frame comprehensive action across policy domains.^[10]

Legal reform should extend to embedding adaptation obligations in law, enabling climate reparations and giving communities legal recourse for climate harm.^[8]

In an international context, Australia’s credibility depends on aligning policy with science-based targets, honouring regional commitments, particularly in the Pacific, and demonstrating leadership in clean-energy export and climate resilience.^[6]

Failing to reform governance and law risks undermining global standing, trade relationships, and Australia’s ability to shape 21st-century green market opportunities.^[6]

Conclusion

Australia’s challenge is multi-dimensional but also resolvable: a nation can both cut emissions and adapt equitably if strategy is coherent, inclusive, and urgent.^[1]

Ensuring the economic transition uplifts rather than disrupts vulnerable communities and sets the tone for fairness and shared prosperity.^[2]

Safeguarding ecology and cultural systems ensures the deeper foundations of Australian social and environmental life persist in a changing climate.^[4]

Law reform, community action, and broad political participation combine to deliver legitimacy and durability for climate policy.^[5]

Australia can maintain and enhance its global standing by demonstrating how climate ambition, justice and regional responsibility can go hand in hand.^[6]

The time to act is now: delays compound risk, erode trust, and magnify costs for people, nature, and economy alike.^[1]

References

1. Climate adaptation in Australia – DCCEEW
2. Australian Government Climate Change Commitments, Policies and Frameworks – AOFM
3. Climate change, environmental extremes, and human health in Australia – The Lancet
4. Australian government climate policies – Australia Pathways
5. Climate adaptation – a multi-billion-dollar problem invisible in Election 2025 – Monash Lens
6. 2035 Climate Targets in Australia: Fact Sheet – Climate Council
7. Chapter 11: Australasia – Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability – IPCC WGII
8. Climate Reparations in Australia: Obstacles and Opportunities – Law Ecology Politics
9. Adaptation planning – National Adaptation Plan – DCCEEW

Back to top

From Science to Street: How Australians Are Building a National Climate Movement - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Independent climate science and public communication are centred at the Climate Council.[1] The Australian Conservation Foundation leads national campaigns to protect nature and press for climate policy.[2] Beyond Zero Emissions produces practical decarbonisation road maps for Australian industries.[3] The Clean Energy Council represents the renewable industry as Australia scales wind, solar and storage.[4] Young people organise and campaign through the Australian Youth Climate Coalition.[5] Scientists and communicators such as Tim Flannery remain influential public voices on climate risks and solutions.[6]

Across Australia a mix of scientists, non-profits, industry bodies, grassroots groups and funders are shaping practical responses to climate change.

These organisations work on mitigation by accelerating renewable energy and on adaptation by helping communities prepare for heat, fire, and floods.

They also pressure governments with research, legal challenges and public campaigns to tighten targets and phase out high emissions industries.

Independent climate communication and analysis helps shift public debate and improve policy literacy in cities and regions.

Young people and community groups have driven high-profile campaigns that changed political conversations about climate action.

Industry bodies and clean energy companies are mobilising investment into large scale wind, solar and batteries across the National Electricity Market.

Think tanks and academic teams create technical road maps that translate emissions reductions into jobs and infrastructure plans.

First Nations organisations and local councils are increasingly central to adaptation planning and land stewardship.

Together they form a distributed ecosystem of advocacy, research, mobilisation, and delivery that is reshaping Australia’s climate response.

Who leads public science and communication

The Climate Council has become a leading independent source of climate science communication and policy advice in Australia. 

It is led publicly by figures such as Amanda McKenzie who helped build the organisation after the federal Climate Commission was abolished in 2009. 2013.^[1]

The Council publishes accessible reports on extreme heat, sea level rise and the costs and benefits of renewable energy to inform public debate and local planning.^[1]

National NGOs and campaigning groups

The Australian Conservation Foundation operates nation-wide campaigns to protect ecosystems and press for stronger climate policies at federal and state levels.^[2]

GetUp! and similar civic organisations combine targeted lobbying, digital campaigning and member mobilisation to hold governments to account on climate commitments.^[7]

Research and practical transition planning

Beyond Zero Emissions specialises in detailed technical and economic pathways that show how Australia can decarbonise electricity, industry, and transport at scale.^[3]

Academic teams and the CSIRO publish modelling and sector road maps that industry and government draw on for planning resilient infrastructure.

Industry, jobs and the clean-energy supply chain

The Clean Energy Council acts as the peak industry body for companies delivering wind, solar, hydro and battery projects and it advocates for clear policy settings to unlock private investment.^[4]

State government programs and private investors are building large scale renewable projects that also create local jobs in regional areas.

Youth, grassroots organising and community action

The Australian Youth Climate Coalition trains and mobilises young people to campaign for stronger emissions targets and community renewable projects, and it reports a long record of youth engagement across Australia.^[5]

School strikes, community solar cooperatives and local resilience networks have pushed climate risks into municipal planning and mainstream media coverage.

Electoral politics and funding for change

Crowdfunded initiatives and advocacy funding have reshaped electoral conversations about climate policy in recent cycles, and groups such as Climate 200 have supported independent candidates who prioritise climate action.

Political organising remains contested and watchdogs and journalists scrutinise how funding, candidate positions and policy commitments interact.

First Nations leadership and on-country adaptation

Traditional Owners and First Nations organisations increasingly lead land management, cultural burning and adaptation programs that reduce fire risk and care for country.

These Indigenous-led approaches are being recognised by some agencies and community partnerships as essential to resilient landscapes and to social justice in climate responses.

Voices from science and public life

Senior scientists and communicators such as Tim Flannery continue to shape public conversations by explaining risks, highlighting links between biodiversity and climate, and advocating accelerated emissions reductions.^[6]

How the ecosystem fits together

Research groups produce the technical options, NGOs translate those options into campaigns, industry bodies push delivery, youth, and community groups create public pressure, and funders and political organising influence decision making.

That distributed model has reduced single points of failure and created multiple pathways for action, from policy reform to local adaptation and direct investment in renewables.

What is missing and where effort concentrates

Advocates say Australia still needs faster planning reform, stronger federal policy to reduce emissions from big emitters, and scaled funding for adaptation in vulnerable communities.

Many organisations now emphasise equitable transitions that protect regional jobs, support workers, and centre First Nations knowledge in adaptation planning.

Conclusion

Australia’s response to climate change is driven by a broad coalition that spans science, civil society, industry, and grassroots action working in different registers from courtroom strategy to community solar projects.

That plural ecosystem is the country’s primary leverage to reduce emissions, protect ecosystems and prepare communities for more frequent heat, fire and flood events.

References

1. Get to know our CEO: Amanda McKenzie — Climate Council
2. About us — Australian Conservation Foundation
3. About us — Beyond Zero Emissions
4. Clean Energy Council — Renewable energy in Australia
5. About — Australian Youth Climate Coalition
6. Tim Flannery — Britannica biography
7. About — GetUp!
8. Climate 200 — About

Back to top

Reefs in Peril: How Global Warming is Unravelling Coral Life - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Coral reefs provide essential ecosystems, coastal protection and economic value. [1] Warm-water coral reefs are highly vulnerable to ocean warming and acidification. [3] Global projections indicate increasing frequency of bleaching and declining reef carbonate production. [9] The Great Barrier Reef (GBR) has seen significant coral-cover declines following recent mass-bleaching events. [2] Bleaching, acidification and biodiversity loss carry profound economic and social consequences. [4] Urgent mitigation and adaptation measures are required to slow reef decline and preserve ecosystem services. [5]

Ocean warming and acidification are pushing coral reefs toward world-wide collapse.

Coral reefs are facing unprecedented pressure from rising sea temperatures, ocean acidification and human impacts.

The global coral-reef crisis is no longer a future risk but a present reality with widespread reef bleaching and degradation.

The Great Barrier Reef off Australia is experiencing especially acute stress, with its coral cover declining sharply following recent heat-waves and mass-bleaching events. ^[2]

Many reef-dependent species are disappearing or failing to recover, undermining biodiversity and ecosystem resilience. ^[6]

These trends are starting to threaten the economic and cultural benefits that reefs deliver to coastal communities and nations. ^[4]

Scientific projections indicate that unless greenhouse-gas emissions fall rapidly, bleaching events will become far more frequent and severe. ^[3]

Local and regional responses offer some hope, but without global mitigation the losses will continue to mount. ^[5]

Policymakers, scientists, and communities must act in concert to defend what remains of these vital ecosystems.

Why coral reefs matter

Coral reefs are built by tiny animals called corals that secrete calcium-carbonate skeletons, which form the reef structure.

They provide habitat for up to one quarter of all marine species despite covering less than 1 % of the ocean floor. ^[1]

Reefs also offer coastal protection by dissipating wave energy, reducing storm damage to shorelines and supporting local fisheries and tourism industries. ^[1]

For example the Great Barrier Reef supports tens of thousands of jobs and contributes billions of dollars each year in economic activity. ^[4]

When reefs degrade the loss of biodiversity, protection and livelihoods can cascade through human communities.

How warming and acidification affect reefs

When sea-surface temperatures rise above normal by about 1 °C to 2 °C for an extended period, corals become stressed and expel their symbiotic algae — a process called bleaching. ^[8]

Bleached corals are not immediately dead, but they are weakened and far more likely to die if stress continues. ^[6]

Ocean acidification occurs as the ocean absorbs more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, reducing carbonate ion availability, which corals need to build their skeletons. ^[7]

Acidified waters thus slow reef growth, weaken structure and hamper recovery from damage. ^[7]

Warming water also increases the frequency of marine heatwaves, which raise stress on reef organisms and reduce resilience. ^[8]

Global projections

Globally, the latest scientific models show coral reefs are increasingly at risk of frequent bleaching and declining carbonate production under continuing warming and acidification. ^[3]

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports high confidence that warm-water coral reefs and other calcifying organisms are already impacted by extreme temperatures and ocean chemistry changes. ^[1]

Some modelling studies project that under high emissions scenarios, many reefs could lose their carbonate-producing capacity by mid-century, undermining reef structure and ecosystem services. ^[9]

Observed ocean acidification trends from the late 20th century to the present indicate accelerating change in surface waters that threaten tropical reef ecosystems. ^[9]

The combined drivers of warming, acidification and local human stressors create a “poly-crisis” for coral reefs globally — with cascading ecological, economic and social impacts. ^[1]

Case study: Great Barrier Reef

The 2 400-kilometre long Great Barrier Reef off Queensland is the world’s largest coral-reef ecosystem and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. ^[2]

The reef has experienced multiple mass-bleaching events in recent years, with large spatial footprints recorded across regions. ^[2]

According to the latest national surveys, some regions recorded double-digit declines in hard-coral cover following heatwaves and bleaching. ^[2]

The 2024–25 events produced some of the largest bleaching footprints observed on the reef and caused high coral mortality in parts of the southern reef. ^[10]

Researchers and monitoring programs have described localised outcomes as catastrophic in places where mortality exceeded 50 percent. ^[6]

The reef underpins significant tourism and fisheries value; its sustained decline risks jobs and economic flows for Queensland communities. ^[4]

With coral cover declining and the frequency of severe events increasing, the reef’s future resilience is being questioned and demands coordinated policy and restoration efforts. ^[2]

What can be done

Reducing greenhouse-gas emissions is the primary global action to reduce ocean warming and acidification and protect reefs. ^[1]

Local measures also matter, including improving water quality, controlling coastal pollution, reducing runoff and managing crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks. ^[2]

Active reef-restoration initiatives such as coral reseeding, assisted migration and targeted propagation show promise but cannot substitute for strong global mitigation. ^[11]

Effective management of reef-dependent industries and adaptation of tourism and fisheries will help local communities cope with reef degradation. ^[5]

International cooperation, funding, and technology transfer are increasingly vital as coral-reef stress becomes a global concern. ^[1]

Conclusions

Coral reefs are under severe and escalating threat from climate-driven warming and acidification, and major economic, ecological and cultural losses are already unfolding. ^[1]

The Great Barrier Reef illustrates how even large, protected reef systems are vulnerable to global stressors and frequent disturbance events. ^[2]

Without rapid global and local action, the capacity of reefs to deliver ecosystem services and sustain biodiversity and communities will be compromised. ^[3]

However, targeted mitigation, adaptation, and restoration efforts can help slow the decline, buy time and sustain reef value into the future. ^[11]

The window for action is narrow, but meaningful change is still possible. ^[5]

References

1. Chapter 3: Oceans and Coastal Ecosystems and their Services – IPCC WGII AR6
2. Annual Summary Report of Coral Reef Condition 2024/25 – AIMS
3. Projections of coral bleaching and ocean acidification for coral reef areas – NOAA Coral Reef Watch
4. Great Barrier Reef more volatile with sharp declines in coral cover – AIMS news
5. Threats to Great Barrier Reef must be ‘tackled simultaneously’ after back-to-back bleaching – ABC News
6. Coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef now at ‘catastrophic’ levels – University of Sydney
7. Ocean acidification impacts on coral reefs: From sciences to solutions – Gattuso et al. (2018)
8. Summary for Policymakers – Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate – IPCC
9. Projections of coral-reef carbonate production and acidification impacts – News-OA ICC
10. Southern Great Barrier Reef Affected By ‘Catastrophic’ Bleaching – Earth.org
11. AI-driven Dispensing of Coral Reseeding Devices for Broad-scale Restoration of the Great Barrier Reef – Raine et al. (2025)

Back to top

Australia’s net-zero challenge - Grattan Institute

Grattan Institute - Tony Wood

Author Tony Wood is the Energy and Climate Change Senior Fellow at Grattan Institute. He was previously the Program Director, from 2011 to 2025, and before then worked at Origin Energy in senior executive roles for 14 years. From 2009 to 2014 he was also Program Director of Clean Energy Projects at the Clinton Foundation, advising governments in the Asia-Pacific region on effective deployment of large-scale, low-emission energy technologies. Note This article was published in The Australian Financial Review, 22 October 2025

The challenges of delivering Australia’s energy transition, and why we must, have never been clearer.

We understand the scope of the challenges, and we have most, but not all, of the solutions. The next few years may determine how well or how poorly we connect them.

For many decades, there has been a globally consistent positive relationship between per capita energy use and GDP.

Like other developed economies, Australia has partly decoupled that relationship as the structure of our economy has shifted. The core challenge of the energy transition is to decouple energy use from emissions.

The imperative to address climate change with a vision that is ambitious and achievable is reflected in Australia’s latest commitment, to reduce emissions by 62-70 per cent below 2005 levels by 2035.

But outside a couple of narrowly defined policies, we do not yet have the energy markets and systems that are fit for the purpose of delivering that result, let alone what must come next.

Energy is the source of about 80 per cent of Australia’s emissions. We have lots of energy sources and delivering that energy has contributed to our economy prosperity. Understanding the future challenges to maintaining that prosperity while addressing climate change requires a look at specific sub-sectors.

Electricity generation’s emissions contribute a third of the total and are projected to be 70 per cent below their 2005 level by 2030. Globally, our prices are in the middle of the pack, and we have had few major issues with reliability. To hit our emissions targets while maintaining affordability and reliability means:

• Building renewable infrastructure and storage at an unprecedented rate.
• Aligning that growth with the closure of increasingly unreliable coal generators.
• Accommodating demand growth from data centres and electrification of gas and transport.
• Integrating battery storage to deliver major improvements in system productivity.
• Working out how to deliver the last 5-to-10 per cent of electricity in a system dominated by solar and wind supply.

More than 20 per cent of Australia’s emissions come from natural gas supply and use. The challenges in reducing these emissions from a few big users and many small users include:

• Moving homes and small businesses to lower-cost electricity while maintaining the safety and reliability of the gas networks.
• Managing the long-ignored problem of failing gas supply in Australia’s south-east.
• Completing a successful review of supply and pricing of east-coast gas.
• Identifying and planning for the likely role of gas as the backup electricity generation source.

Transport fuel emissions contribute about 22 per cent of the total and have been rising. While there are several small sources of transport emissions, the critical challenges are:

• Ensuring that the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard delivers its predicted reductions through to and beyond 2035, supported by expanded charging infrastructure.
• Identifying and supporting actions to address heavy vehicle and aviation emissions, beginning with the $1.2 billion Cleaner Fuels Program.

The government has announced an Electricity and Energy Sector Plan alongside the National Net Zero Plan. The purpose is to support the 2035 target and to chart an ambitious and achievable course to support net zero by 2050.

The sector plan identifies most of the above challenges. It assumes 82 per cent renewables by 2030, partial electrification of gas and transport, and low-carbon liquid fuels for other transport.

It includes deep analysis of what’s producing emissions and describes the sort of changes and pathways that could reduce these emissions. Those changes include assumptions about the actions that will remove a projected residual 163 million tonnes per annum in 2050.

However, the plan lacks clear policies to deliver the changes and to follow the pathways. Beyond numerous assumptions, there is little quantitative analysis, including of the risks ahead, to connect actions with outcomes. The scale is daunting, there are multiple pathways and unknowns, 2035 is alarmingly close, and 2050 is on the horizon.

The challenges are already being used by some politicians and vested interests to argue that Australia should abandon or water down our climate change targets. They are wrong. Tragically, they are only fuelling the ongoing climate war.

Addressing climate change is not our choice. Our only choice is whether we achieve the energy transition well or badly. A clear and predictable action plan is the answer.

Links

• Support The Energy Transition - Step Towards Renewable Energy
• Race to the top: Australia's clean energy momentum
• Australia's energy strategies and frameworks
• How we're tackling Australia's energy transformation
• Renewable energy
• Clean Energy Council: Renewable energy in Australia
• The Global Energy Transition and Critical Minerals
• Jobs versus climate
• Federal Government’s $600m intervention in the energy market

Back to top

Climate Change Is Costing Australians $42.2 Billion in Home Value Losses - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

New analysis finds flood risk has reduced Australian home values by about $42.2 billion.[1] Around one in six Australian homes sit in mapped flood zones and many have lower sale prices.[2] Queensland and New South Wales account for the largest share of lost value, with suburban and prestige areas affected.[3] Flood-prone homes have seen 22 percentage points less price growth than comparable flood-free homes since 2000.[2] Insurance costs, market memory and local planning data are reshaping buyer behaviour and finance decisions.[5] Urgent federal action on emissions and improved, public flood mapping are needed to protect household wealth.[6]

Climate change is quietly washing billions off Australia’s property market.

The Climate Council and PropTrack have released a national analysis showing that flood risk has reduced the value of Australian homes by an estimated $42.2 billion.^[1]

The study combines more than two decades of property sales and hazard mapping to compare long-term price growth for homes inside mapped flood zones with comparable homes outside those zones between 2000 and 2025.^[2]

The report warns that as climate-driven rainfall and coastal extremes intensify, the financial exposure from floods will deepen for homeowners, insurers and the national economy.^[3]

A $42 Billion Warning — What the Data Shows

Flood-prone properties have grown about 22 percentage points less in value than comparable flood-free homes since 2000.^[2]

Across all States, the cumulative loss adds up to around $42.2 billion, concentrated in New South Wales and Queensland, where repeated flood events have reshaped buyer sentiment.^[3]

The report shows that flood exposure is now a key determinant of property value and that the housing market is pricing in climate risk faster than governments are acting.^[1]

Regional Impacts — Who is Losing the Most?

Queensland accounts for 41 per cent of the total national property value loss, with towns from Gympie to Rockhampton bearing repeated flood damage.^[4]

In New South Wales, riverine communities such as Lismore and the Northern Rivers have seen sharp and lasting price impacts after the catastrophic 2022 floods.^[3]

Even inner-city and coastal suburbs once thought insulated, including Brisbane’s west and Sydney’s Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment, now face reduced property values due to new hazard mapping.^[5]

Insurance and Finance — The New Market Reality

Rising insurance premiums are amplifying inequality between flood-exposed and flood-free households, with some families paying ten times more than their neighbours.^[6]

Banks are increasingly factoring in physical climate risk, with some lenders adjusting loan-to-value ratios in high-risk postcodes.^[7]

These changes signal a wider recognition that climate risk is a financial risk, and that markets are beginning to price it accordingly.^[8]

Policy and Planning — Gaps and Delays

Experts warn that most Australian flood maps are outdated or incomplete, leaving communities unaware of their exposure until disaster strikes.^[9]

The Climate Council has urged the federal government to adopt a coordinated national flood mapping program and mandate disclosure of flood risks in property sales.^[1]

Alongside emissions cuts, improved planning, stronger building codes and public awareness campaigns are vital to protect property values and community safety.^[10]

What Happens Next?

Without rapid climate action, the property market will face increasing volatility, with billions more in household wealth at stake.^[6]

Analysts warn that as flood risk grows, insurance retreat and reduced lending could trigger localised housing market contractions.^[7]

For homeowners, investors, and governments alike, the findings mark a turning point where climate inaction carries measurable financial cost.^[1]

References

1. Climate Council & PropTrack: Flood Risk and Property Value Report (2025)
2. PropTrack: The Impact of Flood Risk on Property Prices (2025)
3. ABC News: Flood Risk Costs Australia $42 Billion in Property Value (2025)
4. Brisbane Times: Flooded Towns Face Long Road to Recovery (2025)
5. Sydney Morning Herald: Flood Zone Homes Decline in Value (2025)
6. Insurance News: Flood Premiums Triple for Risk Zones (2025)
7. Australian Financial Review: Banks Factor in Climate Risk to Lending (2025)
8. The Guardian: Property Market Begins Pricing in Climate Risk (2025)
9. ABC News: Outdated Flood Maps Put Homes at Risk (2025)
10. CSIRO: Building Climate Resilience for Australian Communities (2025)

Back to top