COP31 climate change talks seem starkly unambitious.

Extract from ABC News 

Analysis

By Laura Tingle

• Topic:Climate Change

4 hours ago

Climate advocates warn the world cannot afford another decade of delay transitioning away from fossil fuels. (Supplied: Kathleen Lei Limayo)

Estimates vary, but the organisers of this year's UN climate talks in Türkiye said earlier this week that there were 94,866 people in Antalya for the two-week COP 31conference.

That includes all the official delegations, observers and media, not all the other groups who come along for the climate jamboree.

Given that climate change seems to be so far down the list of world leaders' priorities these days, the numbers — which include 34,000 delegates of the various nations attending — seem even more staggering.

The United States, at least at a national level, isn't here since Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement for a second time after regaining office.

Neither are a lot of other world leaders.

China's President Xi Jinping is missing; Vice-President Han Zheng has come instead.

There's no sign of India's Narendra Modi, Canada's Mark Carney or Japan's Sanae Takaichi.

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham turned up very briefly.

Despite this, those who keep the faith on climate change say coming to the COP meetings each year and seeing such huge numbers of people in attendance, gives them hope.

"At least it shows that the rest of us are sticking together," one attendee said.

But pragmatists concede that the process of annual international talks feels like it is, at best, treading water for now.

This week's meeting was the first time it had been conceded that the 1.5°C target had been blown. (Reuters: Wolfgang Rattay)

A '35 by 35' plan

We are a long way from the grand (and failed) ambition of Copenhagen in 2009, when an attempt to set up an entire world regulatory and pricing structure for carbon seemed (briefly) possible.

We are also a long way from Paris in 2015, where a legally binding international agreement was signed by nearly 200 countries to hold the global average temperature increase to "well below 2 degrees Celsius" above pre-industrial levels, while pursuing efforts to limit the increase to 1.5°C.

This week's meeting was the first time it had been conceded that the 1.5°C target had been blown.

The forecast of a 2.6°C increase in warming has also now snuck up to 2.7°C..

In that context, the central plank of this year's talks seems not only starkly unambitious but more rubbery and accommodating of differences.

Australia's climate credibility questioned at UN conference

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has put the Pacific at the centre of his COP31 pitch, but Australia's continued expansion of coal and gas is drawing criticism from climate advocates.

The trajectory of what can be achieved keeps falling, even as the number of climate-related disasters around the world keeps growing.

Turkiye and Australia — as co-presidents of this year's conference — have proposed the world adopt a "35 by 35" plan.

That is, a plan for electricity's share of final energy consumption to increase to around 35 per cent by 2035.

While there is talk of this being a "pledge", the language of the proposal speaks of "advancing the shared ambition" of increasing electricity's share "while recognising different national circumstances and development priorities, and encouraging broader participation and implementation through national action, international partnerships and investment".

In other words, the "pledge" is not only not binding, but it also puts no strictures on just what sort of energy is used to generate this electricity.

In the language of international diplomacy, 35 by 35 "aims to mobilise political support, investment and international cooperation to accelerate electrification in line with national circumstances".

Australia and Turkiye, by happenstance, are among the countries currently most reliant on fossil fuels to generate electricity.

(Also by happenstance, Turkiye announced on the day the climate talks opened that new oil discoveries would help lift daily production to over 100,000 barrels a day in the second half of next year.)

Climate and Energy Minister Chris Bowen, who is chairing the negotiations, says the 35 by 35 target would require countries to quadruple the current pace at which they are electrifying. (Reuters: Murad Sezer)

Not an ambitious target

Some countries, notably France, say the pledge is not worth anything if it is made on the back of fossil-fuel sourced electricity.

Critics say it may lock in fossil fuel use for longer.

Advocates argue that the plummeting cost of renewable energy means the only rational decision to reach when considering future electricity supplies is clean energy.

But it is not always that simple. The complications of individual countries energy systems, the structure and age of electricity grids and infrastructure, let alone the cost, can also limit a country's capacity to switch.

No-one seems entirely sure how this proposal will end up after two weeks of negotiations: will it be an "ambition" or some form of binding pledge?

Electricity currently accounts for about 23 per cent of energy consumption.

It is forecast to rise to 30 per cent on the basis of technology changes already underway.

The international think tank the Energy Transitions Commission has estimated that if the whole 35 by 35 pledge was powered by clean energy it would only cut global warming by about 0.3°C.

With the 1.5°C target already blown, that doesn't sound particularly ambitious.

Climate and energy minister Chris Bowen, who is chairing the negotiations between 190 countries, rejects that, saying the target would require countries to quadruple the current pace at which they are electrifying their energy systems.

That means four times faster take up of electric cars, renewable energy like wind and solar, greener buildings and transport systems.

In a world where global political will on climate adaptation feels like it is on life support, focusing on electrification offers the political advantage that it can be sold as directly addressing household energy costs at a time when a world energy crisis has made that a rather important issue.

COP31 summit targets major electrification push

The climate summit will push for nations around the world to electrify their energy faster and move away from fossil fuels.

Matt Kean, who chair's Australia's Climate Change Authority, was briefly in Antalya at the conference. The Authority's brief relates only to Australia's climate tasks, but he reflected both the reasons why focusing on electrification might make sense in policy terms, but also the political ones in global terms.

"For Australia to hit it's ambitious emissions reduction targets, there are three things that we need to do: decarbonise the grid [that is move away from fossil-fuel based electricity]; electrify as much as we can; and use our landmass to sequester as much carbon as possible," he says.

"Doing those three things largely gets us to 62 to 70 per cent [emissions reduction]. Then we need to invest in research and development, to try and solve the problems of steel and cement, that is, the very-hard-to-abate parts of the economy.

"But let's focus on the things where the technologies are available to us now.

"If you were to electrify, not only is it going to be good for our emissions, but it will also be good for families and businesses through lower bills.

"Every time you drive past the bowser at the moment, you're reminded about the need to get off energy supplies coming from very volatile parts of the world."

The plight of Palestinians in Gaza has been raised this week in environmental terms as well as human terms, and not just by activists like Greta Thunberg.  (ABC News: Ian Cutmore)

The calamities of the world are converging

Meetings like the one in Antalya run on compromise and meetings with eye-glazing titles like the "High Level Event on Matters Related to the Global Implementation Accelerator".

For those who want such meetings to completely shift the dial on the climate discussion, they seem like what Greta Thunberg described in 2021 as just a lot of "blah, blah blah".

There is outrage here that the agenda doesn't even mention cutting fossil fuels directly — a deliberate decision by Turkiye and Australia because talks in so many previous years have foundered on setting any targets or plans to do it.

If you put this year's climate talks in the prism of broader world events, rather than just arguing the questions of what should be done about the climate, they are happening in a world without US leadership, where the international order has been crumbling, and where there seems to be an inverse relationship between the need to solve conflicts and the ambitions or capacity to do so.

It's somehow appropriate that the plight of Palestinians in Gaza or conflicts in Lebanon, Ukraine and Africa have been raised this week in environmental terms as well as human terms. And not just by activists like Thunberg, but by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in his opening address as host of the conference.

"What has taken place in Gaza is not only a genocide; it is also an ecocide," he said.

"Centuries-old olive trees have been cut down in Gaza. The soil and water have been polluted in Gaza. And cities in Gaza have been turned into enormous piles of rubble."

All the calamities of the world seem to be converging.

Laura Tingle is the ABC's Global Affairs Editor.

Methane-reducing supplement made in Noosa commercialised for cattle industry.

Extract from ABC News

By Jennifer Nichols and Jessica Ross

• ABC Rural

• Topic:Agriculture

1 hours ago

Nusqe Spanton says Provectus Algae has made an affordable methane-fighting supplement. (ABC News: Jessica Ross)

In short:

A Noosaville-based company has developed an affordable feed additive for cattle designed to reduce methane emissions from cow burps by about 65 per cent.

What's next?

The Queensland government has granted $3.8 million to help commercialise the supplement.

Affordably reducing methane emissions from Australia's 30 million burping cattle is a step closer, researchers say, after reaching a milestone at an industrial estate minutes from Noosa's Main Beach.

In a shed stacked high with self-cleaning tanks, swirling red algae is being mass-produced under strobing lights.

Nusque Spanton takes a walk through the algae growing room. (ABC News: Jessica Ross)

Founded eight years ago, Provectus Algae has developed what it describes as a library of photosynthetic microbes.

Among its work, it's using algae to make granular and liquid cattle feed additives for feedlots, paddocks and dairy farms.

Now a $3.8 million Queensland government grant will help the company commercialise its cattle feed supplement.

The recipe was built on CSIRO's 2011 discovery that native Asparagopsis seaweed could significantly reduce methane emissions from livestock.

However, a 2024 Murdoch University study found cattle avoided feed with higher Asparagopsis concentrations, and there was evidence of ulceration and inflammation in cows' stomachs.

Asparagopsis seaweed growing in the Provectus Algae laboratory. (ABC News: Jessica Ross)

Provectus Algae CEO Nusqe Spanton said his company swapped the native seaweed out and recreated its processes using other algae and photosynthetic microbes.

"It's a bioidentical product to what's found in the Asparagopsis itself," he said.

"We've been able to bio-mimic the exact constituents we found in the algae species that was originally developed by the CSIRO."

Mr Spanton said livestock happily ate the supplement.

The algae has been turned into a dry cattle feed supplement. (ABC News: Jessica Ross)

"We have done extensive safety testing, and we've proven that there is no residue within the animal, and we've proven safety throughout the animal supply chain."

The CSIRO has estimated ruminant animals, including cows, sheep and goats, which produce methane through digestion, are responsible for more than 10 per cent of Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions.

A lot to learn

Scientists have fitted cattle with unusual-looking high-tech headgear to quantify exactly how much methane they produce, mainly through their burps.

A 2025 study found Australia's grain-fed cattle emissions were 56 per cent lower than previously believed.

The technology to measure methane emissions involves tight-fitting headgear strapped to cows' heads. (Credit: Supplied)

Provectus Algae has run pilot trials with more than 3,000 cattle, including on Mort and Co feedlots on Queensland's Darling Downs.

"We target a range in the feedlot industry, pastoral and dairy applications of around 65 per cent emissions reduction," Mr Spanton said.

He said the supplement worked by targeting microbes in the guts of ruminant animals.

"It's extremely effective … it doesn't affect the broader digestibility microbes that are found in the rumen and therefore doesn't impact the ability for that animal to grow or be healthy in its life cycle," he said.

Nusqe Spanton showed state minister Tony Perrett around the factory. (ABC Rural: Jennifer Nichols)

Queensland Primary Industries Minister Tony Perrett said the state contained half the national cattle herd, worth more than $14 billion to the Queensland economy.

"That's why we're continuing to back smart research, smart people and taking those opportunities into commercialisation," he said.

Race to reduce methane

The Victorian, Tasmanian, South Australian and Western Australian governments have also invested in businesses to accelerate efforts to lower livestock emissions.

University of Melbourne carbon farming professor Richard Eckard said additives worked better in feedlots, where supplements were continuously eaten.

"If you had to deliver it in the northern grazing industry — where we measure our properties in hundreds of square kilometres — well, it's a different challenge," he said.

"It's why we need a mixture of options."

Richard Eckard would like to see the costs of the supplements come down to less than 10 cents per animal. (ABC News: Sean Warren)

Price the problem

Professor Eckard said the cattle industry needed either major productivity gains, or very low priced additives, to get a return on investing in methane-reducing supplements.

"We really needed to get it [supplement costs] below 10 cents an animal per day to get the carbon credit value."

He recommended cattle producers build direct relationships with restaurants and retailers to seek a premium for low-emission food, sought out by environmentally conscious customers.

The algae for the supplements is grown inside this Noosaville factory. (ABC Rural: Jennifer Nichols)

Mr Spanton said he believes his Surf'n'Turf product has a price advantage, with an average cost of 8 cents per animal per day at a ratio of one gram per kilogram of feed.

He said while major gains had been made in cattle genetics, there had been "limited development in improving feed digestibility".

"It could be one of the largest emissions-reductions loads out of any industry over the next 10 years if we are able to succeed in delivering this to a wider market."

Since 1961, the global cattle population has increased by 67 per cent, from 942 million to an estimated 1.5 billion head.

The real test of democracy comes after the election.

 Extract from Eureka Street

• Home
• Vol 36 No 22
• The real test of democracy comes after the election

INTERNATIONAL

• Andrew Hamilton
• 12 November 2026

In the last week, the United States midterm elections have dominated the news, with much of the Australian media welcoming the results as a rejection of populist and authoritarian politics. It may be worthwhile to set the election in the broader context of other recent events and to reflect on the deeper significance of the result.

Three weeks ago, much public comment about the elections was apprehensive. It read the violent French riots as representing the repudiation of democratic institutions by an angry populace. Many people viewed with apprehension the coming series of elections in Serbia, Brazil, the United States and New Zealand. In the first three nations, the elections tested support for populist and autocratic rulers and their governance. Many commentators described them as a choice between progressive and conservative ideas.

After the elections, the mood is more buoyant. In them, voters rejected authoritarian and populist options. They showed respect for democratic processes. Australian commentators focused particularly on the United States election. They believed that voters strongly repudiated the governance of President Trump and of the Republican Party. In that view, they were surely correct. More, however, needs to be said by way of response than beating dead horses.

In the first place, the elections demonstrated the strength of democratic institutions such as the rule of law, the decisive place of the democratic vote in constituting government, and perhaps surprisingly, the relative ineffectiveness of wealth and social media in shaping the way people voted. They also emphasised the importance of local community groups in influencing the ways people voted and the consequent actions of politicians. The strong participation in voting by Latino and Black voters in the United States and by Palestinian Israelis in Israel, and the political campaigns led by students in Brazil and Serbia, affected the results of the elections and created new political possibilities.

 

"In all these elections people voted against the authoritarian parties and governments that had not served them well. In the next elections they will pass judgment on the competence and honesty of Governments that claim to be democratic. They will judge them also on their effectiveness in serving their people’s interests. If a democratic government fails these tests, they may choose one that is authoritarian."

 

Second, however, we should be cautious in assessing the strength of the victory of democratic institutions and of the parties that represented them over authoritarian government. The voting is more accurately described as the rejection of particular authoritarian parties and personalities than as the triumph of democratic governance. United States voters condemned the failure of the Trump government to address the economic needs of people who were impoverished and disrespected by the actions of the government and by the corruption of its representatives. The election in Serbia was also a judgment on the failure of a government to deliver prosperity after a long term in office. The election in Brazil focused on the lack of integrity of the challenger. In all these elections, people voted against the authoritarian parties and governments that had not served them well. In the next elections, they will pass judgment on the competence and honesty of governments that claim to be democratic. They will judge them also on their effectiveness in serving their people's interests. If a democratic government fails these tests, they may choose one that is authoritarian.

Third, in today's world, voters will judge governing parties by the seriousness with which they address gross inequality in society. Wealthy corporations and individuals benefit by controlling people who seek employment, the conditions under which they work and the security of their environment. They also control the exploitation of the natural and social environment. In this situation, governments cannot remedy inequality without offending the interests and power of wealthy individuals and corporations with control of the media. If governments are courageous in addressing the inequality that breeds social resentment, they must persuade people of the wisdom of their actions. Failure to act boldly, however, will increase people's discontent, lead to social resentment, and make certain the party's defeat – perhaps by an authoritarian party – at the next election. The need to reduce national debt will not be seen as an excuse for failing to act.

Fourth, although the crisis of inequality and governance that underlies the present social tension in the world affects politics, it is at heart ethical. It requires politicians and voters to move beyond asking what is politically expedient in making decisions about economic priorities, employment, gambling, and so on. They must make central the value of each human being and the relationships which are central to human flourishing. Those relationships can be spelled out in terms of human rights exercised in a way that embodies the words of the slogan: liberty, equality and fraternity. These are based on the preciousness of each human being and the need to express these qualities in law, in respect and in economic life. Where one word is emphasised without respect for the others, the result is an inhumane world. The liberty of individuals to achieve their own goals, for example, is central. If, however, the desire to amass wealth and power is not guided by respect for the human equality and preciousness of others in society, nor expressed in meeting the demands of fraternity through the debt owed to other, less advantaged human beings, the result is a divided society governed by the tyranny of power. In a democracy, that is unstable and leads naturally to either revolution or tyranny.

Scrupulous respect for human dignity is particularly important today because the development of technology in medicine, communication and health encourages seeing human beings as inferior machines, and so as replaceable. The elections affirmed the priority of human wisdom and relationships over power and wealth in the development and use of technology. They represented a celebration of humane values. They also challenged us not to lose heart in facing the deeper challenges that lie ahead. 

---

Andrew Hamilton is consulting editor of Eureka Street, and writer at Jesuit Social Services.

The Democrats won. Now what?

Extract from Eureka Street 

• Home
• Vol 36 No 22
• The Democrats won. Now what?

INTERNATIONAL

• Jim McDermott
• 12 November 2026 

For months leading up to the U.S. 2026 midterm election, pundits speculated about the possibility of a “Blue Wave” of support for Democrats crashing down upon the Trump Administration and his lapdog Republican Party. But what happened last week in the United States proved to be exponentially more dramatic, a shift to the left in places that haven’t elected Democrats in generations.

And yet unlike in the Australian system, where the re-election of the Albanese government in 2025 was similarly unexpected in the strength of Australians’ support across the country for Labor, the United States bizarrely finds itself now in a situation where the nation has emphatically rejected President Donald Trump and his policies, yet he remains in office for another two years. Having spent the last two years defying the rule of law at home and abroad, Trump seems likely to try to continue. His sudden decision to replace his chief of staff with deputy and personal gargoyle Stephen Miller, largely believed to be the architect of many of the administration’s most horrific actions against immigrants, seems to suggest the same.

A wave affects everything in its path. But then it passes. As the United States wakes up to a new week, Congress’ first week back since September, the big questions are all about what effect the election — and by extension the Democrats — will actually have. The Democrats won't take control of Congress until January, and even then, they will have considerably more power to investigate and obstruct Trump than to implement their own agenda.

Here’s three things to watch.

 

Foreign Affairs

Most Americans, including those who voted for Trump, have spent the last two years stunned at his foreign policy moves. Outside of his weirdly slavish adoration for Vladimir Putin, his campaign gave no signal he would do things like randomly overthrow the government of Venezuela, threaten Greenland, or attack Iran. And even if he had, I’m not sure anyone understood that our system of government could allow him to do these things without Congressional approval.

The Democrats will do their best to rein Trump’s activity in, starting with trying to impeach Secretary of “War” Pete Hegseth—over the weekend the likely new Speaker of the House Hakeem Jeffries said he was a “hard yes” on the move. Republicans subsequently blocked the immediate effort, although Democrats could revive it in January. Even then, removing Hegseth would require a two-thirds majority in the Senate. But as president, Trump will continue to have a lot of latitude to act — and at a time when his domestic policy may be largely stymied, the attention-hungry president may turn to foreign policy even more.

An interesting question: Given the fact that Trump will no longer have a congressional majority, will the leaders of other countries feel the need to continue to suck up to him? Or will more follow the example of the Canadian prime minister Mark Carney and openly defy and/or denounce the president? Also, might military leaders within the United States, who have been repeatedly shamed and abused by Hegseth and had their troops shockingly mistreated as well, do the same?

 

"The Congressional leadership question is a proxy for the real leadership question of our times, one that plagues the parties of Australia as well: Is there anyone out there who can speak to the present moment with humanity, integrity, and vision? It’s one thing to denounce. Who has the courage to step into the fray and lead?"

 

 

Domestic Policy

Some years ago an Australian friend told me about a serious health situation he had been through, and how an experimental drug saved his life. Then he said to me, “If I lived in the States, I’d be dead.”

The U.S. healthcare situation, which has been terrible pretty much our entire lives, has cratered in the last year, after Trump allowed enhanced federal health insurance subsidies to expire at the end of 2025, that enabled the many Americans, whose jobs do not provide health care, to survive.

Marketplace insurers increased premiums by a median of 20 per cent in 2026 and proposed a further median increase of 15 per cent for 2027. Millions have lost coverage in the individual insurance market. The number of Americans going without healthcare has now reached a point where some insurers are pulling out of the system that Barack Obama’s administration put into place.

The fact that the Democrats will control both houses of Congress in theory gives them the ability to create legislation that could impact this situation and others, such as immigration. But in practice, they may have more luck working through a combination of appropriations measures and hearings that rein in the various departments and perhaps remove leaders. They can also investigate the administration and block legislation, although they cannot reverse Trump's executive decisions.

To pass a piece of legislation, they’d need either Trump to accept it, or they’d need enough Republican support to override his veto, which requires a two-thirds majority in both houses. Most legislation would also need 60 votes to overcome a Senate filibuster. It’s certainly possible in some situations the president will allow legislation to go forward, particularly if he thinks if it makes him look good. I would argue that it would be wise for Republicans to defy him at this point, but we’ve been saying that for two years, and instead they decided to go down with their ship.

 

The Electoral College

Is there anything dumber than the Electoral College? And yet, raised on our incomprehensible notion that somehow it’s more democratic to ignore the popular vote because it diminishes the influence of the most populous states, many Americans can’t even see the inherent problem in our system.

In recent times, 19 states have passed legislation requiring the electors who attend the Electoral College to vote for the candidate who wins the popular vote in the nation. Together, they account for 222 electoral votes, 48 short of the 270 needed for the agreement to take effect. Five more states which thus far have not supported the measure — Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin, and Nevada — are now going to be run by Democrats. Should those five states pass the popular vote legislation, their combined elector numbers with those of the existing participants will surpass the 270 needed to win in the electoral college, and the next president of the United States will could, subject to legal challenges, be the person who wins the popular vote. You know, like in a democracy?

The other big question of the moment is leadership. While there’s widespread dissatisfaction across the country with the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate, both Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer seem likely to retain their jobs. Both face growing pressure to step aside, however, with Schumer facing particular opposition from within the party. Jeffries will be the first Black Speaker of the House, which is a big deal. Schumer’s path could be more tenuous — a number of new Senators have already said they will not vote for him. But most think he has the votes. (Come 2028, however, when he is up for his own re-election, most believe if Schumer chooses to run again, he will face the fight of his life from other Democrats in New York State.)

But in a sense the Congressional leadership question is a proxy for the real leadership question of our times, one that plagues the parties of Australia as well: Is there anyone out there who can speak to the present moment with humanity, integrity, and vision? It’s one thing to denounce. Who has the courage to step into the fray and lead?

Right now, there is one American that fits the bill. Unfortunately — or perhaps very fortunately — he’s currently the pope. 

---

Jim McDermott is an American culture critic and screenwriter.

 

Ancient stories in the outback stars to be revealed at Indigenous-owned observatory.

Extract from ABC News

By Charlotte Martin and Jenae Madden

• ABC Eyre Peninsula

• Topic:Stars

15 hours ago

Koonibba resident Stephanie Dudley looks through the telescope at the new observatory. (ABC News: Ashlin Blieschke)

In short:

A remote Indigenous community in South Australia is now the owner and operator of a stargazing facility in partnership with rocket launch company Southern Launch.

The Koonibba Observatory will allow tourists to learn more about Indigenous astronomy.

What's next?

More than a dozen Koonibba community members have signed up to receive training from Southern Launch on how to operate the deep-sky telescope.

When Geraldine Ware was growing up in the remote Indigenous community of Koonibba, she would look up at the stars as Elders passed on the ancient stories of her people etched across the skies.

Now, her remote community in far west South Australia has opened a stargazing facility to help tell those stories.

The Koonibba Observatory was built in partnership with space services company Southern Launch and offers a vantage point from which to view the existing Koonibba Test Range facility, about 40 kilometres north-west of Ceduna on SA's far west coast.

Geraldine Ware addresses the crowd at the opening of the Koonibba Observatory. (ABC News: Ashlin Blieschke)

Ms Ware, now chairperson of the Koonibba Community Aboriginal Corporation board, said it was exciting to think of the possibilities the facility would unlock for her community.

"We have got about 20 [people] to be trained up, so hopefully they'll get perfect at it, and then we can start our tourism in the future," she said.

"There are stories from when we were growing up, sitting around fires and looking at the stars, and we can see it, further on, looking out now."

The night skies on SA's far west coast are some of the darkest and cleanest in the world. (Supplied: Southern Launch)

The new observatory includes a Sky-Watcher Flextube 400P telescope, which is more than 150 centimetres long when extended.

Fears sacred stories will be simplified

However, not everyone from Koonibba, a community of roughly 140 people, more than 96 per cent of whom identify as First Nations, was confident the observatory could convey the ancient stories in the stars or the traditional owners' sacred relationship to the night sky.

Googatha* elder Aunty Sue Haseldine was born on Koonibba Country when it was still an Aboriginal mission, before its transfer to the Aboriginal Land Trust in 1975.

Sue Haseldine has concerns the complex relationship First Nations people have with the stars will be oversimplified for tourists. (ABC News: Ashlin Blieschke)

"The stories that have left Earth live on in the sky … I teach my grandchildren and great-grandchildren how to find their way home by the stars," she said.

She worried that guides might oversimplify Indigenous astronomy for visitors, rather than acknowledge its deeper cultural significance.

"Are they sharing the right [stories], or are they just doing something to keep the tourists happy?" Aunty Sue asked.

Hope for more visitors

Southern Launch chief executive Lloyd Damp said the facility cost more than $1 million to build and was designed to draw in tourists.

He said it would also allow people to view the adjacent Koonibba Test Range, from which the Australian space company has launched commercial rockets since September 2020.

The telescope at the Koonibba Observatory extends 1.5 metres and will allow stargazing of the region's pristine skies. (ABC News: Ashlin Blieschke)

"The facility will support the community as more and more visitors come to watch rocket launches and satellite re-entries," Mr Damp said.

"This is great market validation that what Southern Launch has been spending nine years developing here is in the right place and it's going to have a lot of benefits."

Koonibba Community Aboriginal Corporation chief executive Corey McLennan said the Koonibba Observatory was about the community's future.

"We want to create jobs, grow tourism and investment within our region and give our young people opportunities to learn about science, technology and space whilst also maintaining their connection to country."

The SR75 rocket launch from Southern Launch's Koonibba Test Range in May 2024. (Supplied: Southern Launch)

Recent rocket activity

The head of the Australian Space Agency, Enrico Palermo, said Koonibba was "leading the world, not just Australia" in being the only place in the world that regularly receives capsules from space.

Its most recent mission was the successful re-entry earlier this month of the W-8 capsule from Varda Space Industries for commercial and US defence industries.

That W-8 capsule lifted off aboard Elon Musk's SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket as part of the Transporter-18 rideshare mission.

Varda Space Industries's W-8 capsule landed in Koonibba after its earlier launch from a SpaceX aircraft. (Supplied: Southern Launch)

Southern Launch provides mission services for orbital launch, sub-orbital missions including hypersonic flight, orbital re-entries, and range services for the global space industry.

The company is headquartered in Adelaide and manages two spaceports, the Koonibba Test Range and the Eyre Peninsula Whalers Way Orbital Launch Complex, the latter of which is still under development.

*While Kokatha is the spelling often associated with the Traditional Owners of a large area in the west of South Australia, Googatha is sometimes the preferred spelling. 

Six killed in Israeli air strike on Gaza's Nasser Hospital.

Extract from ABC News

By Middle East correspondent Matthew Doran

• Topic:Unrest, Conflict and War

7 hours ago

The aftermath of an Israeli strike on a southern Gaza hospital.

In short:

Six people, including a surgeon, have been killed in an Israeli air strike on a hospital in Gaza, Palestinian health authorities say.

The Nasser Hospital surgery department was hit and at least 20 people were injured.

The IDF says Hamas was using the hospital as a command centre.

Palestinian health authorities say a surgeon is one of at least six people who have been killed in an Israeli strike on Nasser Hospital in southern Gaza.

The attack happened in the early hours of Thursday morning, local time. Video from the scene shows extensive damage to one of the compound's buildings.

Gaza's Civil Defense agency said the surgery department was hit and that at least 20 people were injured in the blast.

Israeli strikes kill eight people in Gaza, medics say

Israeli strikes killed at least eight Palestinians, including five police officers, in the Gaza Strip in two separate attacks, according to medics and the Hamas-run interior ministry.

Hours after the strike, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said a "senior Hamas terrorist and additional terrorists" had been using the hospital as a command centre.

"Targeting a medical facility that includes patients receiving treatment and teams performing their humanitarian and professional duty represents a serious attack on the health system and a flagrant violation of international laws and conventions that ensure the protection of medical facilities, employees and patients," Gaza's health ministry said in a statement.

"The ministry confirms that the continued targeting of hospitals and their medical facilities exacerbates the suffering of the sick and wounded, and threatens what remains of the ability of the health sector to provide its services, in light of the catastrophic conditions in the Gaza Strip."

Rizk Abu Shaira was the surgeon who was killed, the ministry said.

"He never hesitated to provide service to his patients," the head of Nasser Hospital, Dr Ahmed al-Farra said.

"He was on top of his work. He was in his room, between following up cases, treatments and preparing cases for surgery, but it was God's will and he was martyred in this treacherous strike. 

"There are also doctors who were wounded in this attack."

Hamas labelled the strike a "fully fledged war crime".

At least six people have been killed in an Israeli air strike on Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, in southern Gaza. (Reuters: Ramadan Abed)

Israeli group condemns attacks on health system

Israel regularly justifies attacks on medical and humanitarian facilities by insisting they lose their protections under international law if they are used by Hamas for terrorist activities.

In this instance, the IDF said Hamas had been using Nasser Hospital as a command centre and claimed the buildings were being used to store weapons and conduct interrogations.

Israeli forces revealed the identity of their target, Muhammad Abu Ismail, hours after their first acknowledgement of the attack.

"Muhammad Abu Ismail was responsible for overseeing the activities of the brigade’s terrorists and directing them to advance and carry out terrorist plots against IDF troops and Israeli civilians.

"He was also responsible for holding numerous hostages captive throughout the war."

Earlier, the IDF released graphics showing the building it hit, but did not provide any further evidence to back up its claims about its use by Hamas.

Measuring Israel's expansion across the Middle East

ABC analysis reveals the extent of Israel's expansion on four fronts: Lebanon, the West Bank, Gaza and Syria. 

"The IDF and the [Israel Security Agency] strongly condemn the Hamas terrorist organisation's cynical exploitation of civilian and medical infrastructure for military purposes, while endangering the lives of patients, medical personnel, and civilians," it said in a statement.

"Prior to and during the strike, steps were taken to mitigate harm to civilians, including the use of precision munitions and aerial surveillance."

The IDF also released audio of what it said was a warning issued to the health ministry for Hamas to cease using hospitals across the strip, or risk further action by the military.

"Israel's genocide in Gaza continues under the guise of a ceasefire," Israeli advocacy group Physicians for Human Rights Israel said.

"Repeated attacks on hospitals and healthcare workers are further devastating an already shattered healthcare system, denying Palestinians in Gaza access to essential medical care and the ability to recover and live in dignity.

"The international community's inaction and continued impunity enable these attacks on Gaza's healthcare system. As long as those responsible are not held accountable, the attacks will continue."

Nasser Hospital targeted multiple times

Palestinian health authorities say more than 1,600 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks since the October 2025 ceasefire, many of them civilians, including women and children.

The death toll in Gaza now stands at more than 74,600 people.

Nasser Hospital has been targeted a number of times during the three-year long war in Gaza, triggered by Hamas's deadly attacks on Israel in October 2023.

UN inquiry on Gaza and the West Bank

Israel has continued to commit genocide in Gaza since last October's ceasefire, according to a report from UN-commissioned experts. Israel has rejected the findings as "misinformation".

On August 25 last year, the hospital was the scene of a "double-tap" strike by Israeli forces.

The IDF claimed it was targeting a Hamas terrorist when it opened fire on a camera operator who had placed his camera on the outside of the hospital to film the Khan Younis skyline.

Minutes later, as emergency workers and fellow journalists were crawling over the site of the attack, another strike hit the building.

Twenty-two Palestinians were killed that day, including five journalists.

Among them were journalists working for the Associated Press and Reuters. The agencies and other media outlets condemned the strikes.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu labelled that incident a "tragic mishap" and the IDF said it had launched an investigation into the matter.

Its findings are yet to be released.

Gaza's health ministry says the strike on Nasser Hospital was a "flagrant violation of international laws". (Reuters)

Israeli attacks across Gaza have reportedly increased in recent days, despite the ceasefire being in place.

Progress towards the next stage of the ceasefire remains stalled, with Hamas saying it will lay down its weapons only if Israel stops launching strikes and withdraws from territory.

Israel says it will only stop once Hamas demilitarises and no longer poses a threat to the country.

Both sides have been criticised for the delays, although the Trump administration-backed Board of Peace has ratcheted up its rhetoric against the Israeli government in recent months, accusing it of avoiding holding up its side of the bargain.