Food Systems

Food systems discussion paper Food Systems Discussion Paper No. 3
Food system governance in Australia: Co-creating the recipe for change (PDF) 6 MB

Transforming food governance has been identified as one of the most pressing challenges facing Australia’s food system. Food is central to our environment, our social relationships, our health and our economy; but food-related laws, policies, regulatory arrangements and multi-stakeholder relationships are complex, and often not transparent.


Food Systems Discussion Paper No. 1Food Systems Discussion Paper No. 1
A Research Agenda for Food Systems (PDF) 4.6 MB

This paper sets out an agenda for food systems research. The local and immediate context for this task is the fledgling Food Systems Program located in the Global Change Institute at The University of Queensland, but the opportunity and need for food systems research is growing rapidly both in Australia (PMSEIC, 2010) (Ridoutt et al., 2014) (Keating et al., 2014) and internationally (Foresight, 2011) (GFS, 2015) (IPES, 2015).


Discussion Paper No. 2
Urban Food systems – a renewed role for local governments in Australia (PDF) 5 MB

Urbanisation is one of this century’s most transformative trends, with over half the world’s human population now living in cities. City governments are increasingly aware of their potential role and responsibilities in managing the increasingly complex urban spaces in the face of rapid population growth, climate change, high ecological urban footprints, rising inequalities, and profound nutrition transitions. This profound urban shift has significant implications for governments, individuals, urban households, and rural communities.


 

Sustainable Water

Discussion Paper No. 4
Water, sanitation and hygiene in remote Indigenous Australian communities: a scan of priorities

In remote Australian Indigenous communities, the ‘familiar story’ of poor water, sanitation and hygiene-related health challenges continues – despite documentation of this situation during the past thirty years. The representatives interviewed in this scan strongly recommended to stop perpetuating this story: ‘This is not new stuff.  You know, you can look back and do some research for decades and what I'm telling you today is what was being said 20 years ago, so it's not like any of this is new’ (NGO representative #1). In parallel, they also called for providers to raise their expectations for the standard of these services in all Australian locations – including remote communities: ‘Non-indigenous people who go out to communities quickly lower their expectations to what’s the prevailing norm …  You’re in Australia now, so the benchmark is an urban [clinic] in Darwin or Sydney, not a clinic at the back of Jakarta’ (research representative #2).


Discussion Paper No. 3
Strengthening community participation in meeting UN Sustainable Development Goal 6 for water, sanitation and hygiene

Countries have much work to do to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. But development projects don’t always go the way you expect. A resettlement project in Laos recently provided taps and toilets as a way to improve hygiene and health outcomes for communities. But on revisiting the resettled village, the project team was dismayed to find that the new brick toilet facilities were instead being used to store rice.


Discussion Paper No.2
Achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals for water and beyond

This University of Queensland discussion paper from the Water for Equity and Wellbeing Initiative was developed to consider Australia’s efforts to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals in Australia, and within the broader Asia-Pacific region.

 


Discussion Paper No.1
The UN Sustainable Development Goals for Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

Australia is positioned next to south-east Asia, where one billion people lack access to adequate sanitation facilities. Only half the population in the Pacific Island countries have access to such facilities, while poor hygiene and unsanitary living conditions have contributed to children in remote Australian Aboriginal communities experiencing a higher rate of common infectious diseases than in large urban communities.

 


Clean Energy

Discussion Paper No. 7
Determining Viable Contract-for-Difference Prices and Revenue Receipts for Gatton Solar Research Facility (PDF) 2 MB

In this paper, we investigate the role that a Contract-for-Difference (CFD) feed-in tariff might play in underpinning increased investment in renewable energy in Australia. We investigate two particular CFD designs: two-way and a one-way CFD. We develop a financial model that is capable of determining commercially viable CFD strike prices for different renewable energy projects. In this modelling, we take account of revenue from wholesale electricity market and renewable energy certificate sales. We also include capital and operational costs of the project including distribution of funds for holders of equity and debt. We present findings bases on analysis of the solar array located at UQ Campus Gatton Australia, employing a typical meteorological year framework. Our major findings are that governments will prefer a two-way CFD design and Single-Axis tracking solar array technology. Project proponents, however, will strongly prefer a one-way CFD design.


GCI Discussion Paper No.6Discussion Paper No. 6
Projecting Solar PV Yield of the Solar Array Installed at UQ Gatton Campus Using NREL’s SAM Model (PDF) 2 MB

The viability of utility scale solar PV farms will depend critically upon the annual production of such farms. A crucial determinant of solar PV yield will be prevailing solar irradiance and weather conditions.  In Australia, the combined effects of weather relating to solar irradiance, temperature and rainfall on PV yield is likely to be closely linked to the El NiƱo–Southern Oscillation ENSO cycle. To investigate this we use NREL’s SAM model to simulate electricity production from a 3.275 megawatt pilot solar PV plant at the University of Queensland’s Gatton Campus. A key finding was that the best simulated PV yields were obtained during 2013 and 2014 when ENSO neutral conditions but with an El Nino bias prevailed. The worst years were 2010 and 2011 which were characterised by moderate and weak La Nina phases of ENSO. All other years considered had average PV yield outcomes including 2015 which experienced a very strong El Nino event.


Discussion Paper No. 5
Assessment of the Comparative Productive Performance of Three Solar PV Technologies Installed at UQ Gatton Campus Using The NREL SAM Model (PDF) 2.6 MB

The economic assessment of the viability of different types of solar PV tracking technologies centres on assessment of whether the annual production of the different tracking technologies is increased enough to compensate for the higher cost of installation and operational expenditures incurred by the tracking systems. To investigate this issue, we use the NREL’s SAM model to simulate electricity production from three representative solar PV systems installed at Gatton. In these simulations we use hourly solar irradiance, weather and surface albedo data, technical data relating to both module and inverter characteristics and impacts associated with module soiling and near-object shading. A key finding was that over the period 2007 to 2015, average increases in annual production of between 23.9 and 24.3 per cent and 38.0 and 39.1 per cent were obtained for Single Axis and Dual Axis tracking systems relative to the Fixed Tilt system.


Levelised Cost of Energy (LCOE) of Three Solar PV Technologies Installed at UQ Gatton CampusDiscussion Paper No. 4
Levelised Cost of Energy (LCOE) of Three Solar PV Technologies Installed at UQ Gatton Campus (PDF) 2.8 MB

Economic assessment of the viability of different types of solar PV tracking technologies centres on assessment of whether the annual production of the different tracking technologies is increased enough relative to a benchmark Fixed Tilt system to compensate for the higher cost of installation and operation incurred by the tracking systems. To investigate this issue, we calculated the LCOE of three representative solar PV systems. These calculations depend crucially on assumptions made about ($/kW) construction costs as well as annual capacity factors of the three solar technologies considered. A key finding was that the Single Axis Tracking technology was the most cost competitive, followed by a Fixed Tilt system. A Dual Axis Tracking system was the least cost competitive technology of those considered. We also considered how LCOE could underpin a ‘Contract-for-Difference’ feed-in tariff scheme.


Discussion Paper No. 3
Comparative Productive Performance of Three Solar PV Technologies Installed at UQ Gatton Campus (PDF) 3 MB

Economic assessment of the viability of different types of solar PV tracking technologies centres on assessment of whether the annual production of the different tracking technologies is increased enough relative to a benchmark Fixed Tilt system to compensate for the higher installation and operational costs incurred by the tracking systems. To investigate this issue, we use the PVsyst software to simulate electricity production from three representative solar PV systems installed at Gatton. In these simulations we use hourly solar irradiance, weather and surface albedo data, technical data relating to both module and inverter characteristics and impacts associated with module soiling and shading. A key finding was that over the period 2007 to 2015, average increases in simulated annual production of between 17.7 and 17.9 per cent and 36.5 and 36.7 per cent were obtained for Single-Axis and Dual-Axis tracking systems relative to the Fixed Tilt system.


Connect with us