The offshore wind industry faced another setback as Vineyard Offshore announced the withdrawal of an 800 MW wind energy project from Massachusetts’ procurement process. The decision follows Connecticut’s refusal to participate in a tri-state wind energy agreement, leaving Vineyard unable to secure contracts for the full 1,200 MW Vineyard Wind 2 project. This development underscores the ongoing difficulties of aligning state-level cooperation with the financial realities of large-scale renewable energy initiatives​.

The Background: A Fragmented Approach to Regional Cooperation

Vineyard Offshore had planned to develop the Vineyard Wind 2 project as part of a coordinated New England solicitation involving Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. Massachusetts provisionally awarded 800 MW of the project, contingent on Connecticut purchasing the remaining 400 MW. However, Connecticut opted for solar and electric storage projects instead, citing its renewable energy priorities. This left the Massachusetts portion of Vineyard Wind 2 in limbo​.

Massachusetts has struggled with earlier offshore wind commitments as well. Of the 3,200 MW of offshore wind capacity previously secured, 75% was recently eliminated when projects such as Commonwealth Wind and SouthCoast Wind were deemed financially unviable under their original agreements​.

Economic Viability: The Achilles’ Heel of Offshore Wind

The economic conditions driving Vineyard Offshore’s retreat mirror broader struggles within the offshore wind sector. Rising costs and inflation have forced developers to renegotiate contracts, often with little success. Massachusetts, for instance, has faced repeated delays and price increases for its wind projects, adding to the uncertainty surrounding the sector’s ability to deliver affordable energy​.

While Vineyard Wind 1 remains under construction, it has experienced its own share of delays and challenges, reflecting the turbulence that accompanies large-scale offshore wind developments. Without a stable economic foundation, the feasibility of expanding this industry to deliver consistent energy remains questionable.

Implications for Renewable Energy Efforts

Vineyard Offshore’s withdrawal leaves Massachusetts with only 2,678 MW of offshore wind capacity in its pipeline, far short of its anticipated needs. The state plans to issue another solicitation in 2025, but ongoing delays and cancellations are complicating its ability to advance new projects​.

The fragmented approach among states also highlights the difficulty of coordinating renewable energy strategies across jurisdictions. Despite shared interests, differing priorities and economic considerations have hindered efforts to create a unified regional framework for offshore wind development.

Looking Ahead: Lessons and Challenges

The offshore wind sector’s current trajectory raises critical questions about its future. Policymakers and industry stakeholders must address the disconnect between renewable energy ambitions and the financial realities facing developers. Enhanced regional cooperation, realistic cost assessments, and flexible contracting mechanisms may offer pathways to a more stable model for offshore wind, but the likelihood that an industry built on hype, fantasy, and a firehouse of government subsidies can resolve this, is slim.

For now, Vineyard Offshore’s withdrawal emphasizes the challenges of financing and implementing large-scale offshore wind projects. As a new US administration, openly hostile to the industry, is about to take power, the viability of the industry as a significant player in the energy market remains bleak.

From the MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN

Francis Menton

It has been obvious now for many years to the numerate that the fantasy future powered by wind and sun is not going to happen. Sooner or later, reality will inevitably intrude. And yet, the fantasy has gone on for far longer than I ever would have thought possible. Hundreds of billions of dollars of government largesse have been a big part of the reason, going not just to green energy developers but also to academic charlatans and environmental NGOs to fan the flames of climate alarm.

It was three years ago, in December 2021, that I asked the question, “Which Country Or U.S. State Will Be The First To Hit The Green Energy Wall?” The “green energy wall” would occur when addition of wind and solar generators to the grid could no longer continue, either due to regular blackouts or soaring costs or both. Candidates for first to hit the wall considered in that post included California, New York, Germany and the UK. I wrote then:

All these places, despite their wealth and seeming sophistication, are embarking on their ambitious plans without ever having conducted any kind of detailed engineering study of how their new proposed energy systems will work or how much they will cost. . . . As these jurisdictions ramp up their wind and solar generation, and gradually eliminate the coal and natural gas, sooner or later one or another of them is highly likely to hit a “wall” — that is, a situation where the electricity system stops functioning, or the price goes through the roof, or both, forcing a drastic alteration or even abandonment of the whole scheme.

Three years on, it looks like Germany is winning the race to the wall. After a couple of decades of “Energiewende,” Germany has closed all of its nuclear plants and much of its fossil fuel capacity, with a huge build-out of wind and solar generation. How’s that going? The German site NoTricksZone posts today an English translation of a piece yesterday by Fritz Vahrenholt at the site Klimanachrichten (Climate News). The translated headline is “Two brief periods of wind doldrums and Germany’s power supply reaches its limits.” Excerpt:

From November 2 to November 8 and from December 10 to December 13, Germany’s electricity supply from renewable energies collapsed as a typical winter weather situation with a lull in the wind and minimal solar irradiation led to supply shortages, high electricity imports and skyrocketing electricity prices. At times, over 20,000 MW, more than a quarter of Germany’s electricity requirements, had to be imported. Electricity prices rose tenfold (93.6 €ct/kWh).

They avoided blackouts this time (barely) by importing more than a quarter of their electricity during the times of wind/sun drought. But the sudden demands for huge imports caused the spot price of electricity in the markets to soar, affecting not only Germany but also the neighbors who supplied the power. Vahrenholt provides this map indicating the prices reached during the December wind/sun drought:

€ 936.28/MWh is almost $1 per kWh. And that’s a wholesale price; retail would be at least double. By contrast, average U.S. electricity prices are well under $0.20/kWh.

Vahrenholt reasonably attributes the huge price spikes to elimination of reliable nuclear and fossil fuel plants, leaving Germany subject to the vagaries of the wind and sun:

The reason [for the price spikes]: The socialist/green led coalition government and the prior Merkel governments had decommissioned 19 nuclear power plants (30% of Germany’s electricity demand) and 15 coal-fired power plants were taken off the grid on April 1, 2023 alone.

From Wolfgang Große Entrup, Managing Director of the German Chemical Industry Association:

“It’s desperate. Our companies and our country cannot afford fair-weather production. We urgently need power plants that can step in safely.”

It is also clear from Vahrenholtz’s map how Germany’s sudden surge of demand affected the countries that supplied the imports on short notice — particularly Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Austria. Here is the reaction in Norway:

Norway’s energy minister in the center-left government, Terja Aasland, wants to cut the power cable to Denmark and renegotiate the electricity contracts with Germany. He is thus responding to the demands of the right-wing Progress Party, which has been calling for this for a long time and will probably win the next elections. According to the Progress Party, the price infection from the south must be stopped.

And the same from Sweden:

Swedish Energy Minister Ebba Busch was even clearer: “It is difficult for an industrial economy to rely on the benevolence of the weather gods for its prosperity.” And directly to Habeck’s green policy: “No political will is strong enough to override the laws of physics – not even Mr. Habeck’s.”

When the neighbors decline to continue to supply Germany with imports during its wind/sun droughts, then it will be blackouts instead of price spikes. We continue to move slowly toward that inevitability.

In other news from Germany, its auto industry is struggling (also from soaring energy prices, not to mention EV mandates), and its government has just fallen. Economic growth has ground to a halt. This is what the green energy wall looks like. Elections will be held some time in the new year.

I’m feeling cautiously optimistic that the world will wake up from the green energy bad dream before the damage turns to disaster. Our incoming U.S. administration seems to have caught on. Germany, sorry you had to be the guinea pig for this failed experiment.

From Quadrant

Tony Thomas

Melbourne University, sometimes billed as the Parkville Asylum,  is ranked by The Times as top in Australia and 39^th worldwide. I’m sure a peer-reviewed paper last March from its Disasters, Climate and Adversity Unit made a small contribution to this on-campus glory. The study is Growing up in Victoria, Australia, in the midst of the climate emergency.[1] In this paper the all-female cohort of authors describe how they are turning schoolkids from the age of 12 into “Climate Superpowers” — shock troops, in other words, for the green blob — “developing themselves as agents of change”.

The program resonates with me. I recall my days as a Young Pioneer in Perth in the 1950s. I was proud of my uniform of white shirt and red scarf, and our repertoire of songs from the German Democratic Republic under Wilhelm Pieck. We’d bunch together in a commuter bus to Fremantle and sing the “Bau auf!” song:

Build up, build up, free German youth, build up. Build for a happy future, build for a happy life!

 To condition kids as green rather than red thinkers, the Parkville authors have created a roadmap in the form of an online climate quiz. It’s illustrated with green and pink climate-fighting hobgoblins with light-bulbs sprouting from their heads.

I wouldn’t mind being a Climate Superpower so I took the quiz in my “young person” persona, while chewing my pencil and side-glancing at cat videos on TikTok. Each question has a set of multiple choices– none are “wrong”, I must just prioritise them. A sample:

How would you prefer to learn about climate change and climate action?

By listening to young leaders like Greta Thunberg and speakers at the Schools Strikes 4 Climate.

By listening to economists who talk about fair transitions to clean energy.

By hearing from scientists and other experts on climate change and climate justice.

Which of these makes you feel the most hopeful?

Clean energy is getting cheaper every year.

Thanks for the tip, but why has my two-person townhouse bill risen to, like, $2300-plus?

We have all the resources we need to stop climate change now

i.e. stopping it for the first time in earth’s 4.5 billion year history. If Trump, China, India, Russia, Italy and Argentina get in our road, so much the worse for them.

Addressing climate change will also help us build a more inclusive, fair and beautiful society.

Melbourne under Labor, certainly inclusive of Palestine supporters, is a “fair and beautiful society” — apart from that synagogue arson a few weeks back.

(editor’s note: more of those loaded questions and Tony’s commentary can be found at the foot of this page).After doing the quiz the kids explore 120 “secret missions” using their climate Superpowers. The missions involve climate studies and “taking everyday action, transforming society and self-care.” I was going to print out a few pages, but stopped in my tracks when I read

Finally, young people said the website itself shouldn’t harm the environment – it should be powered by renewable energy, with no hard copies of the information. 

The climate superpowers gig for 12-years and upwards is billed as “a project by the University of Melbourne, with young co-designers in Victoria.” It was developed on what are described as the unceded lands of the Kulin nation (If the sovereign Kulins have a foreign-aid program, I hope they’ll allocate a few billion towards Jim Chalmer’s budget deficit.) The Superpowers co-designers involved and consulted 31 youngsters aged from 12-25 who did five workshops, and another 50 kids who gave desultory feedback. It is clear the kids were already climate-addled as they “sought to gain a sense of connection, agency, and hope.” The uni recruited them through school climate strikes, a “young citizens’ jury” on climate at a doubtless Greens-run city council, school “sustainability” groups and the campus “children and disasters advisory committee”.

The five workshops involved Mao-like struggle sessions against the climate: each kid “discussed their personal experiences navigating climate change.” Given that “climate” comprises 30-year average weather, I don’t think the youngsters had time for too much of that “climate-crisis navigating”, although they might have noticed the droughts and flooding rains mentioned by some long-dead poet.

Here’s where the nitty-gritty gets interesting. The kids’ cohort broken down by age group:

♦ 12-13: females 7, males zero;

♦ 14-18: females 9, males zero;

♦ 18-25 (metro): females 6; males (hooray!) two;

♦ 18-25 (regional): females 6; male (hooray!), one.

If my maths are up to it, that’s 29 young females and three young males. As an apparent afterthought the study mentions(emphasis added)

the research participants overwhelmingly consisted of girls and young women, and our university-based research team also comprises solely women.[2]

The project was expanded last year via Year 10 trials at Academy of Mary Immaculate high school in Fitzroy, taking participants from 31 to “about 40” and feedback from about 50 to “about 70” kids. Mary Immaculate is Victoria’s oldest girls’ high, and houses the Sisters of Mercy Convent. I can’t imagine the expansion injected any testosterone into the findings. [3]

The authors remark that women, with their alleged altruism and compassion, tend to be more climate-scared than blokes, who might view “caring about climate change as uncool.” However, the authors seem more shame-faced about the lack of “marginalised and oppressed” youngsters in their sample, than the near-absence of guys. The peer-reviewers were obviously unfussed by the lopsided sample. In one workshop, an earnest young person (odds-on, female) described the different ways young people can contribute to climate justice:

Some people interpret [climate justice] as like, literally striking every day, or like talking to their politicians. And then there’s also [those who] stop eating meat. I think thinking about how everyone interprets it differently, it’s also really important.

As the authors acknowledged, the university’s “climate superpowers” exercise seethes with PhD-wielding ladies. For example, an hour-long learned webinar I sat through had four female presenters plus one off-screen, plus one lone guy. He seemed to be overcompensating on masculinity, referring to “jerks in charge and wanker leaders on Linked-In” (at 35.15mins). He added, “I don’t have to tell you that twice!”.

The tute grew chaotic when a very mature-aged student, calling himself “an honorary eco-anthropologist”, demanded the audience grapple with capitalism. He asked, “Should we tweak it or transcend it with a finer system dedicated to social justice, democracy and a safe climate?”

Instead of telling him to put a sock in it, the presenters nodded that capitalism was indeed the “elephant in the room” and with a questioner, considered whether to “dismantle” the metaphorical pachyderm or even “eat” it. (1.00.0) In their intellectual repartee, it emerged that the Melbourne University Fossil Free Club has withered and died because of competition from the Palestine and gender-diversity ferals, who have made the climate emergency look dated (52.00).

The webinar ended with the off-screen presenter summing up, “I was hoping that we might able to tie a bow around this rigorous conversation with, you know, academic flair, as well as acknowledge that we can promote hope, coping and wellbeing in relation to climate change through the curricula and off-curriculum as well.”

Finally, my screen flashed up the university motto (from Horace), postera crescam laude, which google translates as “I shall grow in the esteem of future generations”.A facet of this seminar was the prodigious titles awarded to the lady presenters, eg gig leader Phoebe Quinn was introduced a “superpower-ess leader on campus”. Another lecturer (“she/her”) was a specialist in education and science, philosophy of environmental education, and interdisciplinary sustainability and climate studies, as well as environmental social psychology. Delving deeper, I found via LinkedIn that her Master’s research

explored co-productions of environment amongst graduate environments students, underpinned by post-qualitative methodologies and new materialist/material feminist theory. This work demonstrated the significance of human-environment boundary (re)configurations, (embodied) temporalities, and ethico-onto-epistemological inheritances in students’ relational creation of/with environment.

Clear on all that?

The university’s Climate Superpowers project is to be rolled into classrooms in 2025, along with extra resources for “Teacher Mental Health and Wellbeing”.[4] This add-on will help teachers, perhaps fretting over their own household power bills, to convince kids about “clean energy getting cheaper every year”. Project leaders Phoebe Quinn and Dr Katitza Marinkovic Chavez were gathering input from teachers about their mental coping last September quarter.

I did wonder who was paying the Carlton Crew to keep teachers and kids in a state of superpowerdom. The website’s young helpers have required that it should be “transparent about funding and where the resource comes from”. The teacher-sanity add-on is alone consuming the time of seven professors as “Investigators”, plus at least seven doctoral or pre-doctoral helpers.[5] But here’s an oddity: my searches never discovered what this exercise is costing.

The teacher-sanity leg involved some money from the Teacher Health Foundation. This charity paid $100,000 for the superpower project plus a Newcastle Uni project about “an approach to optimising schoolteacher food”. I didn’t know that “schoolteacher food” needs optimising: maybe this involves Friday morning sponge cake in the staffroom. A teacher friend did explain that “teacher’s cordial” was shorthand for Johnny Walker Red Label. Anyway, for teacher sanity research we’re talking no more than a five-figure sum as this external contribution to the university.[6]

The rationale for bestowing “Climate Superpowers” on schoolkids is to offset their angst’s “overwhelm, withdrawal, anxiety” about climate change and give them chirpy solutions to China’s burgeoning emissions (one or more new coal-fired plants per week). For example, on the political front, kids can set about

influencing governments but also people and communities. It could involve going to rallies, signing petitions or voting a certain way.” Or maybe “spiralling up” by riding a bike, or “influencing your family to buy solar panels” which can “build a sense of agency and hope”. Each action, we’re told, “will also help your superpowers grow even stronger!

The authors don’t actually seem all that upset about kids’ climate grief, seeing it as a spur to kiddie activism:

Studies in Australia have demonstrated that climate anxiety can motivate for young people to get involved in climate action, leading to a stronger sense of hope and agency.

The team continues to venerate Greta Thunberg’s “neurodivergent” climate insights. As presenters they haven’t yet caught up with Greta in her keffiyeh outfit chanting “F—k Germany! And f—ck Israel!” rather than “How dare you [emit CO2]! ” The material includes, “Read about climate leadership from young activists like Greta Thunberg’s The Climate Book…Or check out this cool interactive timeline of Greta’s work!”

The authors quote their kid clients on Thunberg:

She literally sounds like one of us, and she was rejected by everybody around her, who didn’t think that what she was fighting for was worth it. — 12–13 yo, Metropolitan Melbourne

And let’s not forget she’s a she. That would have been extra hard for her as well, being a girl. When girls have their own opinions, they’re called bossy. — 12–13 yo, Metropolitan Melbourne

The project is keen to shelter its kids from sceptical parents and other nay-sayers. They recommend several anti-sceptic combat sites, which have “no magic answers” to sceptics but at least make 12yo climate doom-criers feel more supported and less freaky.

The website has links to further reading. Sample titles include, starting from the birth to kindergarten demographic. Citizen Baby: My vote; We March; and “V is for voting”. As kids mature from kindergarten, they can enjoy Our House is on Fire and The Tantrum That Saved the World . Young Adult fare includes Youth to Power, How to Change Everything , Youth Climate Courts: How You Can Host a Human Rights Trial for People and Planet, and The Future of Earth: A Radical Vision for What’s Possible in the Age of Warming.

If kids get panicky about their imminent climate doom, the university refers teachers and parents to the climate psychology crowd:

It is important to recognise that while they are rational responses and can motivate action, for some children these feelings can be debilitating, leading to reactions like nightmares, numbness, and despair.

The child-helpers’ remedy involves what they call “realistic hope” that warming can be stopped by popular effort and technology to pull CO2 out of the skies.

“Give them examples of the big problems we have solved before, such as abolishing slavery and apartheid, winning women the right to vote, and saving the Franklin River,” goes one recommendation.

The superpower youngsters had fully absorbed misinformation from Tim Flannery’s Climate Council and other spruikers that all nasty weather events stem from global warming. However, as one superpower late-teen put it,

This general omniscient sense of doom around the world is just too much for humans to physically handle. I got so depressed when there was smoky haze over the sky every day. And [then] it’s like, “Oh, whatever, it’s not there anymore.”

The anti-capitalist messaging drummed into kids can also backfire. As a 14-18yo kid put it,

I know a lot of people who go, “Well, if there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism, what’s the difference. I’m just gonna live in the moment.” Meanwhile, what’s happening at the coalface (or renewablesface) in climate classrooms can be found in a paper by Tasmania University researchers: “The burden of bad news: educators’ experiences of navigating climate change education.”[7] It quotes teacher “Andy”, a climate pessimist trying to make kids optimistic:

The direction of things isn’t looking hopeful, but I try and use language that will encourage students to feel empowered and want to make a change and fight for action rather than be like, “OK, well, it’s the end of the world.”

The paper outlines that few teachers have the science nous to teach climate, nor the counselling/therapy expertise to deal with the kids’ emotional trauma. On science, its recommendation is more-or-less to throw it out the window:

Science learning alone is not enough to support young people in learning and preparing for climate change. More holistic and dialogic approaches to teaching young people about climate change are required…

Collaborations across teaching subjects/disciplines, as well as outside of curricula (e.g. citizen science, climate games) may also be able to foster the holistic exchanges and learning needed to provide young people with more tangible and ‘real-life’ understandings of climate change…

The prevailing cultural norm in western education systems is to downplay subjective experience in favour of factual learning. This norm acts in part to justify what is taught using a lens of objectivity, thus reducing the potential criticism that teaching is politically motivated. It is also a way of maintaining control over groups of young people, who are often portrayed as emotionally volatile and immature…

Specifically, we suggest that schools are appropriate spaces to describe, respect and explore feelings about climate change… Such approaches could build on existing pedagogies that harness students’ emotional reactions to historical injustice. One example of recent teaching practice that does not shy away from uncomfortable emotions is the history of colonisation of indigenous peoples. For instance, the Tasmanian educational resource ‘From Gumnuts to Buttons’ powerfully evokes shock, anger, and sadness by helping learners to see European invasion through the eyes of Aboriginal inhabitants…

Recognising and respecting the spectrum of emotional responses to climate change can help educators to develop students’ collective motivation to change the status quo, honour their feelings of injustice, and foster empathy for the people, places and species most affected by climate change. [Emphases added]

As usual, these climate hangers-on in academia have no idea how ragged and unscientific their climate notions are. Australia’s top dog in orthodox climate science is Andy Pitman of UNSW. He’s chair of the Academy of Science’s National Committee for Earth System Science and director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes. Last month he admitted on behalf of the Academy that “we are building our climate policies on crumbling foundations” and there’s “critical gaps in our understanding” and “our knowledge is incomplete”. Sensationally, he concedes that current climate models can’t predict whether natural disasters will become more or less common in the warming era. In other words, warming might make actually weather milder and more comfortable. Moreover, extra vegetation might increase our CO2 emissions rather than reduce them. So much for well-meaning kids planting trees.

Warming might bring welcome rains rather than the dreaded droughts. So-called “tipping points”? El Ninos vs La Ninas? “These are not easily solvable but offer profoundly different futures for Australia,” he admits.

Given his Academy paper last month, “expert” activists keen to recruit schoolkids to the net zero cause, might as well throw their curriculum drafts into the bin and start on a clean page and with a decent dash of objectivity and humility.

Tony Thomas’s latest book from Connor Court is Anthem of the Unwoke – Yep! The other lot’s gone bonkers. $34.95 here

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

You are helping to organise a School Strike 4 Climate. What would be your role?

I’m invited to donate from $25 to $2500 and referred to SS4C’s opening catechism that reads:

We acknowledge that we meet, organise and strike on stolen Country, and that sovereignty has never been ceded. First Nations peoples are disproportionately on the frontlines of the climate crisis, and therefore must be enshrined at the forefront of the climate movement. There can be no climate justice without First Nations justice.

I then ticked the boxes about my preferred roles:

Being a speaker at the strike to demand more climate action. Convincing your school Principal to support students to go to the strike. Designing eye-catching banners and signs. Helping everyone stay motivated and supporting my teammates when things get stressful.

Next quiz question:

What would help you feel better if you felt overwhelmed about climate change?

Making art to express my feelings and raise awareness about climate change. Joining groups that push for changes in government, policies, and laws.

Which of these are most like something you would do?

Writing a letter to a politician about climate action

Having just watched Chris Uhlman’s masterful climate take-down on Sky last night, I’m writing to Climate Minister Chris Bowen right now to ask how he’ll back up his trillion-dollar wind and solar monopoly.

Creating infographics, memes, or videos about climate change and sharing them over social media. Fundraising and circulating petitions to save the Great Barrier Reef.

Coral extent has been at a record level for three years straight, why does the reef need to be “saved”?

Which everyday actions are you most likely to take to help fight climate change?

Participating in a theatre production or art project about climate change. Giving emotional support to your sibling (or other children in your life), who is feeling anxious about climate change.

I’ll write a calming email to my elder sister in Perth, who says its hot in summer there.

Buying less new stuff (e.g., re-using, repairing and buying secondhand.

 Which of these would you love to do as a job?

Being a climate change researcher or educator. Being Environmental Minister. Painting murals or making music to inspire others to engage in climate action.

Like ABC chair Kim Williams, I’m a failed clarinettist.

Leading communications and social media campaigns for climate action.

What makes you feel proud of yourself?

I am in touch with my creativity, spirituality and imagination. I’m great at making a convincing argument.

 What would help you feel better if you felt overwhelmed about climate change?

Making art to express my feelings and raise awareness about climate change. Joining groups that push for changes in government, policies, and laws… connecting with my values and beliefs for building a better world.

REFERENCES:

[1] International Journal of Behavioral Development 2024, Vol. 48(2) 125­ –131

[2] “ It is essential to recognize the limitations of our study, which may impact the generalizability and validity of our results, as they might not represent the views and experiences of Victorian youth at large.”

[3] Mary Immaculate alumni include Anne Henderson, of hubbie Gerard’s Sydney Institute and co-owner of Media Watch Dog’s blue heeler Ellie. Other alumni include supermodel Abbey Kershaw and ex-ACTU president Jed Kearney.

[4] “Guidance on how the Climate Superpowers website aligns with school curricula and tertiary education frameworks will also be developed and tested.”

[5] Professor Lisa Gibbs, Dr Katitza Marinkovic, Phoebe Quinn, Jane Nursey, Prof Mehmet Ulubasoglu, A/Prof Sean Cowlishaw, Prof Erdal Tekin, Prof Vanessa Cobham, Robyn Molyneaux, Dr Rebecca Patrick, Prof Dianne Vella-Brodrick, Prof Ann Sanson, and Nathaniel Barker.

[6] Project funders include a Climate Research Accelerator Grant from Melbourne Climate Futures; the Climate CATCH Lab (Collaborative Action Towards Transformative Change in Health and Healthcare) at UniMelb and a UniMelb Wildfires Futures Hallmark Research Initiative supporting author Katitza Marinkovic.

[7] The burden of bad news: educators’ experiences of navigating climate change education. Environmental Education Research 2023, vol. 29, no. 11, 1678–1691. https://ift.tt/vRSGh8r