Latest news with #RMIT
The Guardian
a day ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Australians losing billions in savings due to poor management of appliance efficiency scheme, audit finds
Australian households and businesses are missing out on billions of dollars of power bill savings, an expert has warned, after a scathing audit found the department in charge of the efficiency scheme for appliances has failed to properly administer it. The poor administration of the program has left consumers worse off, said Alan Pears, a senior fellow at RMIT and Melbourne University, who helped develop appliance energy standards in Victoria. Pears warned the program needs a wider rethink, including strengthening 'weak' minimum standards which are preventing people getting access to or buying the most efficient appliances, leading to higher energy bills. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The Greenhouse and Energy Minimum Standards (Gems) Act ensures products meet minimum energy performance standards and energy rating label requirements. The labelling requirement includes the energy efficiency star-rating stickers often seen on refrigerators or dishwashers. But the National Audit Office (ANAO) report found the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water is not measuring the program's impact on reducing emissions. The report said the department 'is not measuring the program's impact on reducing energy consumption and carbon emissions and so cannot demonstrate whether the program is achieving its intended purpose'. Issues flagged in the ANAO report and could negatively impact its credibility, Pears said. Pears said the energy rating stickers 'have a lot of credibility with people' and is 'relied upon' by consumers. 'The issue we face now is, if the program is not being properly administered – and clearly it hasn't been – then the government and the energy sector too are at risk of … losing credibility with consumers.' The department has said the scheme has saved households and businesses between $12bn and $18bn in energy costs since the Act was legislated in 2012. Between 2021 and 2022, it said consumers saved between $1.3bn to $2bn, and greenhouse gas emissions were reduced between 4.1m and 6.3m tonnes. But Pears said the broad gap in estimated figures suggests the scheme isn't working as intended. 'The fact that there's such a wide band reflects the fact that they have some idea but not a very precise idea of what the benefits are,' he said. Pears said that beyond the administrative gaps, the current minimum standards are 'weak' compared to best-practice regions like the European Union or China. For example, the EU began enforcing a new rule this year for the energy consumption of electrical appliances in standby or off-mode, which it says will save consumers up to $950m between now and 2030. If Australia were to raise its standards, Pears said every household or business could save 'thousands' of dollars over the lifetime of each appliance. 'Because our standards are quite weak, we don't necessarily get the most efficient products,' Pears said. Under the legislation, companies test their appliances in approved laboratories according to the minimum standards. Thedata is sent to the climate change department for review. If compliant, the appliance is approved for sale in Australia. The department can perform a 'check test' on products to independently to ensure they are compliant. The audit said the number of check tests has been decreasing over recent years, and haven't targeted areas with the 'greatest risk of non-compliance'. In the financial year 2013-2014 the department conducted 188 check tests, according to the ANAO, but in 2021-22 just 61 models were checked. The department told the ANAO it aims to test between 60 and 70 products annually. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Pears said this can allow some bad actors to get away with subpar testing. Pears said an effective testing program is similar to speed cameras on the road. 'If you think you might get caught for speeding, you'll obey the speed limit. With any regulatory system like appliance efficiency, if you think you might be caught, you're much more likely to do things properly.' Since the program was established in 2012, the department has issued just four infringement notices, none which were paid or enforced. The audit office report said this could 'limit the department's ability to effectively encourage compliance and deter non-compliance'. ANAO's report also found that, in many cases, the same person within the climate change department was in charge of assessing and approving or rejecting a product. 'Without effective segregation of duties, there is risk that products that do not meet the requirements of the relevant Gems determination may be approved for registration. This also increases the risk of human error or corruption,' the report said. Pears also believed information on appliance efficiency stickers should be improved. He wants the government to spend more money to improve consumers' understanding of the rating system, and ensure the system is fit for purpose. 'You have to be careful because the star rating is based on the size of the appliance, not necessarily on its actual energy use. So if you've got a seven-star enormous television, that can still be using a lot more energy than a much smaller TV that's got a low star rating.' The department responded to the audit, accepting all of its nine recommendations, and said work is already under way to improve the program. ANAO recommended check testing be targeted to areas with the greatest risk of non-compliance. It also recommended the department develop performance measures to assess the effectiveness of the program in achieving its outcomes. In a statement, the department confirmed it has established a taskforce to improve the program, and has begun 'expanding the availability of check facilities' to encourage better compliance.
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Almost 70% of top Australian universities tumble in global ranking amid Trump-era attacks and international student cuts
Dozens of Australia's top universities have tumbled down in a global ranking amid a 'turbulent year' for higher education, as attacks from Donald Trump's second administration exacerbated years of disruption for the embattled sector. The University of Melbourne, Australia's highest performer, dropped seven places to 19th in the QS World University Rankings, run by the global higher education specialist Quacquarelli Symonds, while the University of Sydney dropped from 18th in the world to 25th. The University of New South Wales, the nation's second best performer, dropped from 19th to 20th. The rankings, released on Thursday, drew from millions of academic papers and insights from 127,041 academics across 1,501 universities in 106 countries. Overall, 25 of Australia's 36 ranked universities (69%) declined in this year's results and just seven moved up, amid the rise of competitors in the Asia-Pacific region. It was the third biggest percentage drop in the world behind Austria (88%) and Russia (85%), at the same time as the US continued to perform the best among the traditional big four study destinations, which include Australia, the UK and Canada. Angel Calderon, the director of strategic insights at RMIT and a member of the rankings advisory board, said recent federal government discussions on limiting the number of international students coupled with financial constraints had not helped universities. 'Over the past five years, we have seen the reputation of Australian universities gradually decreasing,' he said. 'Organisational restructuring, staff movements, operational deficits, and any kind of disruption are likely to influence institutional perceptions elsewhere.' The categories rank universities based upon their reputation, teaching and learning, research impact, internationalisation and, since 2022, sustainability. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Australia was particularly hard hit in its academic and employer reputation, with 20 and 30 universities declining in rank respectively in those categories. However, it continued to perform strongly in its citations per faculty and global engagement, including international faculty members. Calderon said the poor performance came at the same time universities in Asian countries were 'rapidly improving' because of increased government or private sector investment in education and research. Mainland China and India had particularly strong upward trends, with more than 40% of their universities rising in the rankings, while four of New Zealand's eight universities also improved compared with last year. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology retained the top position for the 14th consecutive year, followed by Imperial College London and Stanford University. 'The inconvenient truth is that reputation is an issue which continues to adversely impact Australian universities' performance in global rankings,' Calderon said. 'The relative decline in standing for both the academic and employer reputation measures has been in the making for several years. Here lies a key opportunity for the collective of Australian universities to ensure learners are better supported. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'The results are a wake-up call to Australia … our universities must adapt by providing quality education to the communities they serve if they want to remain competitive, relevant, and boost national productivity.' Despite the dire overall picture, Australia still ranked fifth globally for the proportion of universities ranked in the world's top 100, with 25% making the list, behind Hong Kong and Singapore (56% and 50% respectively). Nine Australian universities were ranked in the top 100. But of those, five of the high performing Group of Eight (Go8) sandstones moved down. The CEO of QS, Jessica Turner, said there were 'areas of concern' for Australia's higher education system, pointing to the reputation dip coupled with a government crackdown on international students. Since 2023, the commonwealth has introduced a range of migration reforms to 'restore integrity' to the international education sector, including higher visa fees and English language requirements and slowed visa processing for some 'high risk' countries. 'International students have been drawn into a wider national debate in Australia around migration and housing, where they are sometimes perceived as contributing to systemic pressures,' she said. 'In what has been a turbulent year for Australian higher education, universities are calling for sustainable research funding models and greater policy certainty around international education. 'These are critical to safeguarding and strengthening one of Australia's greatest national assets, particularly as the country faces growing competition from across the APAC region.' At least seven Australian universities have had research programs temporarily suspended by the Trump administration this year, while a dozen universities were sent a questionnaire asking to confirm whether they aligned with US government interests. The chief executive of the Go8, Vicki Thomson, said the results came against a backdrop of global uncertainty and 'mixed messaging' from Australia's largest research partner, the US. 'This … threatens our very capacity to deliver on our mission of education and research,' she said. 'And yet despite these headwinds, Australia continues to punch above its weight … that we have two Go8 members ranked in the top 20 and six in the world's top 50, is an outstanding result and must not be taken for granted but rather leveraged in these contested times.'
Sydney Morning Herald
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Sydney Morning Herald
Marilyn Monroe did it, so did Chappell Roan – but what is the point of a stage name?
'A celebrity's name is fundamentally part of who they are. When movies use names like Margot Robbie or Quentin Tarantino, it instantly boosts its perceived value before we even see the trailer. Names carry associations. They've got specific prestige, tones, they set certain expectations.' Loading Much of this star power doesn't come from the name itself, but the persona behind it. However, some believe that to develop such a star persona, one must begin with the right label. For example, singer Alicia Keys changed her surname to represent her love of music. 'Names are an instrument utilised for identity management. They're a form of strategic branding or even intentional rebranding,' Burgess says.'It could allow for a creative rebirth, helping people enter a different area of specialisation and offering them more legitimacy.' Certain names can expose stars to new audiences, says RMIT music industry and pop culture lecturer Kat Nelligan. David Bowie (David Robert Jones) not only used a pseudonym, but also a string of other personas including Ziggy Stardust and Aladdin Sane, all of which allowed different demographics to engage with him on various levels. 'Lady Gaga embodied a male alter ego, Jo Calderone, at the 2011 MTV Music Video Awards,' Nelligan says. 'That persona was a way for Gaga to not only express herself artistically, but to also reach queer audiences. It's a way to explore artistry, and to toy with different identities.' Pseudonyms can also operate as a boundary, she adds. Chappell Roan's name represents her more confident self, and also separates her public and private lives, something the singer has made clear is critical to her. 'In that way, pseudonyms could be tied to mental health and preserving the self,' Nelligan says. Is it just a Hollywood thing? No. Pseudonyms are common in other entertainment industries too, including Bollywood and K-Pop. 'It can be quite common for Bollywood actors trying to crack into a Western market. You start to see some of that colonial influence,' Burgess says. 'Stars may anglicize or simplify names to avoid marginalisation. Or perhaps they just want their name to be more memorable, to stand out on a more global level.' Meanwhile, in the K-Pop realm, Nelligan says adopting a stage name is often part of the transparently commercial process producers and studios go through to create pop stars. Examples include Suga from BTS, whose real name is Min Yoong, and Rosé from Blackpink (Park Chaeyoung). 'K-Pop is an industry built on this idea of a machine. It's curated and very strategic in how a K-Pop star is produced, so it makes sense that pseudonyms are used in that context.' Sean Redmond, associate dean of media, writing and publishing at RMIT, says many female authors used male pen-names during the 19th century due to misogynistic gender norms. 'George Elliot used a male pseudonym because of gender prejudice in publishing, and because she lived an 'unconventional life' – Mary Ann Evans lived with a man, but they weren't married,' Redmond says. Similarly, some male actors used pseudonyms to appear more masculine. 'John Wayne was born Marion Robert Morrison, a name deemed too feminine, or even too Italian, for American viewers. The director Raoul Walsh chose the name Wayne, inspired by revolutionary war hero Mad Anthony Wayne.' Some American-Jewish actors changed their names because of concerns around antisemitism, Redmond adds. For example, Edward G. Robinson's real name was Emanuel Goldenberg, while Kirk Douglas' real name was Issur Danielovitch. Others may even use a pseudonym to protect themselves from the law, such as Banksy, the street artist whose anonymity is a significant part of their appeal. Authentic or phoney? Loading Pseudonyms do not diminish a person's craft, Nelligan says – stage names are often forms of artistic expression. 'People are generally more concerned with whether an entertainer is staying true to their values. Let's say there's an artist who sings about climate change, but then they don't walk that talk. Audiences feel more duped by that … The pseudonym is neither here nor there in that sense. 'The view that a person's real self needs to be embedded in the music or literature is outdated … We still want to trace it to a person, but it doesn't matter if they use a pseudonym.' Although a lack of transparency around a public figure's name can generate engagement and intrigue, Nelligan says it can also leave fans with nowhere to channel that fascination. Burgess agrees, noting some pseudonyms could even appear deceptive. For instance, record producer Dr Luke, who was embroiled in a now-resolved legal battle against Kesha, went by the name Tyson Trax on Doja Cat's 2020 song Say So. 'You might see some negativity there because some people may not have supported the work if they had known he was involved. The name carries a lot of weight,' Burgess says. 'Consumers demand transparency and authenticity, but we also have to remember there are people behind these pseudonyms who obviously want some degree of privacy, and often it's not for sinister or deceptive reasons.'
The Age
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Age
Marilyn Monroe did it, so did Chappell Roan – but what is the point of a stage name?
'A celebrity's name is fundamentally part of who they are. When movies use names like Margot Robbie or Quentin Tarantino, it instantly boosts its perceived value before we even see the trailer. Names carry associations. They've got specific prestige, tones, they set certain expectations.' Loading Much of this star power doesn't come from the name itself, but the persona behind it. However, some believe that to develop such a star persona, one must begin with the right label. For example, singer Alicia Keys changed her surname to represent her love of music. 'Names are an instrument utilised for identity management. They're a form of strategic branding or even intentional rebranding,' Burgess says.'It could allow for a creative rebirth, helping people enter a different area of specialisation and offering them more legitimacy.' Certain names can expose stars to new audiences, says RMIT music industry and pop culture lecturer Kat Nelligan. David Bowie (David Robert Jones) not only used a pseudonym, but also a string of other personas including Ziggy Stardust and Aladdin Sane, all of which allowed different demographics to engage with him on various levels. 'Lady Gaga embodied a male alter ego, Jo Calderone, at the 2011 MTV Music Video Awards,' Nelligan says. 'That persona was a way for Gaga to not only express herself artistically, but to also reach queer audiences. It's a way to explore artistry, and to toy with different identities.' Pseudonyms can also operate as a boundary, she adds. Chappell Roan's name represents her more confident self, and also separates her public and private lives, something the singer has made clear is critical to her. 'In that way, pseudonyms could be tied to mental health and preserving the self,' Nelligan says. Is it just a Hollywood thing? No. Pseudonyms are common in other entertainment industries too, including Bollywood and K-Pop. 'It can be quite common for Bollywood actors trying to crack into a Western market. You start to see some of that colonial influence,' Burgess says. 'Stars may anglicize or simplify names to avoid marginalisation. Or perhaps they just want their name to be more memorable, to stand out on a more global level.' Meanwhile, in the K-Pop realm, Nelligan says adopting a stage name is often part of the transparently commercial process producers and studios go through to create pop stars. Examples include Suga from BTS, whose real name is Min Yoong, and Rosé from Blackpink (Park Chaeyoung). 'K-Pop is an industry built on this idea of a machine. It's curated and very strategic in how a K-Pop star is produced, so it makes sense that pseudonyms are used in that context.' Sean Redmond, associate dean of media, writing and publishing at RMIT, says many female authors used male pen-names during the 19th century due to misogynistic gender norms. 'George Elliot used a male pseudonym because of gender prejudice in publishing, and because she lived an 'unconventional life' – Mary Ann Evans lived with a man, but they weren't married,' Redmond says. Similarly, some male actors used pseudonyms to appear more masculine. 'John Wayne was born Marion Robert Morrison, a name deemed too feminine, or even too Italian, for American viewers. The director Raoul Walsh chose the name Wayne, inspired by revolutionary war hero Mad Anthony Wayne.' Some American-Jewish actors changed their names because of concerns around antisemitism, Redmond adds. For example, Edward G. Robinson's real name was Emanuel Goldenberg, while Kirk Douglas' real name was Issur Danielovitch. Others may even use a pseudonym to protect themselves from the law, such as Banksy, the street artist whose anonymity is a significant part of their appeal. Authentic or phoney? Loading Pseudonyms do not diminish a person's craft, Nelligan says – stage names are often forms of artistic expression. 'People are generally more concerned with whether an entertainer is staying true to their values. Let's say there's an artist who sings about climate change, but then they don't walk that talk. Audiences feel more duped by that … The pseudonym is neither here nor there in that sense. 'The view that a person's real self needs to be embedded in the music or literature is outdated … We still want to trace it to a person, but it doesn't matter if they use a pseudonym.' Although a lack of transparency around a public figure's name can generate engagement and intrigue, Nelligan says it can also leave fans with nowhere to channel that fascination. Burgess agrees, noting some pseudonyms could even appear deceptive. For instance, record producer Dr Luke, who was embroiled in a now-resolved legal battle against Kesha, went by the name Tyson Trax on Doja Cat's 2020 song Say So. 'You might see some negativity there because some people may not have supported the work if they had known he was involved. The name carries a lot of weight,' Burgess says. 'Consumers demand transparency and authenticity, but we also have to remember there are people behind these pseudonyms who obviously want some degree of privacy, and often it's not for sinister or deceptive reasons.'
The Advertiser
10-06-2025
- General
- The Advertiser
Check before you chuck: how bigger labels can end waste
Australians could be saving thousands of dollars in a cost-of-living crisis by not throwing away perfectly good food which can be solved with a simple change - bigger fonts. A report by RMIT and End Food Waste Australia has found that clearer, more consistent date labels and storage advice with bigger print and simple icons, could drastically reduce the amount of food ending up in the bin. Australians waste a whopping 7.6 million tonnes of food, much of it still safe to eat, according to the food advocacy group. The 41-page-study released on Wednesday showed poor label design and inconsistent packaging were key reasons consumers throw out food. Researchers estimated the waste adds up to $2500 per year for an average household. Lead author RMIT Associate Professor Lukas Parker said consumers deserve better. "They're being let down by labels that don't give them the information they need to make the right call," he said. "It's time for a consistent, clear system that helps people make smarter choices, saves money and keeps good food out of the bin." The report said consumers often misinterpret "best before" and "use by" dates which leads to tonnes of food being thrown out prematurely. But it's easier said than done without buy-in from the whole sector. End Food Waste Australia CEO Tristan Butt said cutting food waste through smarter labels will only be a reality seen on supermarket shelves if government, retailers and food producers work together. "Clear, consistent date labelling is one of the most cost-effective and scalable ways to reduce household food waste, but it won't happen without industry-wide collaboration," he said. "This single change could prevent nearly a million tonnes of food waste by 2030." Australians could be saving thousands of dollars in a cost-of-living crisis by not throwing away perfectly good food which can be solved with a simple change - bigger fonts. A report by RMIT and End Food Waste Australia has found that clearer, more consistent date labels and storage advice with bigger print and simple icons, could drastically reduce the amount of food ending up in the bin. Australians waste a whopping 7.6 million tonnes of food, much of it still safe to eat, according to the food advocacy group. The 41-page-study released on Wednesday showed poor label design and inconsistent packaging were key reasons consumers throw out food. Researchers estimated the waste adds up to $2500 per year for an average household. Lead author RMIT Associate Professor Lukas Parker said consumers deserve better. "They're being let down by labels that don't give them the information they need to make the right call," he said. "It's time for a consistent, clear system that helps people make smarter choices, saves money and keeps good food out of the bin." The report said consumers often misinterpret "best before" and "use by" dates which leads to tonnes of food being thrown out prematurely. But it's easier said than done without buy-in from the whole sector. End Food Waste Australia CEO Tristan Butt said cutting food waste through smarter labels will only be a reality seen on supermarket shelves if government, retailers and food producers work together. "Clear, consistent date labelling is one of the most cost-effective and scalable ways to reduce household food waste, but it won't happen without industry-wide collaboration," he said. "This single change could prevent nearly a million tonnes of food waste by 2030." Australians could be saving thousands of dollars in a cost-of-living crisis by not throwing away perfectly good food which can be solved with a simple change - bigger fonts. A report by RMIT and End Food Waste Australia has found that clearer, more consistent date labels and storage advice with bigger print and simple icons, could drastically reduce the amount of food ending up in the bin. Australians waste a whopping 7.6 million tonnes of food, much of it still safe to eat, according to the food advocacy group. The 41-page-study released on Wednesday showed poor label design and inconsistent packaging were key reasons consumers throw out food. Researchers estimated the waste adds up to $2500 per year for an average household. Lead author RMIT Associate Professor Lukas Parker said consumers deserve better. "They're being let down by labels that don't give them the information they need to make the right call," he said. "It's time for a consistent, clear system that helps people make smarter choices, saves money and keeps good food out of the bin." The report said consumers often misinterpret "best before" and "use by" dates which leads to tonnes of food being thrown out prematurely. But it's easier said than done without buy-in from the whole sector. End Food Waste Australia CEO Tristan Butt said cutting food waste through smarter labels will only be a reality seen on supermarket shelves if government, retailers and food producers work together. "Clear, consistent date labelling is one of the most cost-effective and scalable ways to reduce household food waste, but it won't happen without industry-wide collaboration," he said. "This single change could prevent nearly a million tonnes of food waste by 2030." Australians could be saving thousands of dollars in a cost-of-living crisis by not throwing away perfectly good food which can be solved with a simple change - bigger fonts. A report by RMIT and End Food Waste Australia has found that clearer, more consistent date labels and storage advice with bigger print and simple icons, could drastically reduce the amount of food ending up in the bin. Australians waste a whopping 7.6 million tonnes of food, much of it still safe to eat, according to the food advocacy group. The 41-page-study released on Wednesday showed poor label design and inconsistent packaging were key reasons consumers throw out food. Researchers estimated the waste adds up to $2500 per year for an average household. Lead author RMIT Associate Professor Lukas Parker said consumers deserve better. "They're being let down by labels that don't give them the information they need to make the right call," he said. "It's time for a consistent, clear system that helps people make smarter choices, saves money and keeps good food out of the bin." The report said consumers often misinterpret "best before" and "use by" dates which leads to tonnes of food being thrown out prematurely. But it's easier said than done without buy-in from the whole sector. End Food Waste Australia CEO Tristan Butt said cutting food waste through smarter labels will only be a reality seen on supermarket shelves if government, retailers and food producers work together. "Clear, consistent date labelling is one of the most cost-effective and scalable ways to reduce household food waste, but it won't happen without industry-wide collaboration," he said. "This single change could prevent nearly a million tonnes of food waste by 2030."
