Markets 
Weather 
Yes, schools do have a heat problem and one issue is the grounds (“The number of NSW schools with synthetic turf revealed”, January 25). They are high foot-traffic areas, so grassy areas very quickly become dust bowls. Asphalt, as we all know, also reflects heat although stands up to the foot traffic much better. Now there is the added problem of fake grass. Some schools have more trees and have encouraged planting. Grass, however, does not grow well under some trees and still wears with heavy traffic, so some have resorted to chips and mulch. Each has their problem as well as benefit, and each has an effect on classroom heat. Classrooms in many instances are already hot as they are poorly designed and insulated “hot boxes”. Parents and Citizens Associations have spent a lot of money putting in air-conditioning, and now we are told they are contributing to heat by their effort to find a suitable surface for children’s play. Even the rubberised surfaces some schools have installed have heat-associated problems – and, I might add, a rubbery smell when hot. It is a difficult problem to solve when schools have not been built with heat or even cold in mind, but simply to accommodate so many students per room – all of whom are radiating more heat. It is iniquitous that everywhere else in the commercial world the users of buildings expect decent cooling and heating in their workplace, but students and teachers are supposed to put up with their uncomfortable circumstances. It is iniquitous that parents have to pay for so many of the improvements to grounds and classrooms. This is a provider’s problem, not the parents’, who should not have to rely on public fundraising.
Augusta Monro, Dural
SA lights the way on renewables
Your article on the history and projected trajectory of South Australia’s courageous push toward 100 per cent renewables was both timely and enlightening (“The SA miracle: How one Australian state leads the world on renewables”, January 25). The Coalition missed no opportunity to heap derision on South Australia’s renewable energy ambitions, particularly after the far-reaching blackouts of 2017. Those events were relentlessly weaponised to undermine the state’s transition. One important name, however, was missing from your account: Jay Weatherill, South Australian premier from 2011 to 2018. Many will remember the on-camera stoush between Weatherill and then-minister for the environment and energy, Josh Frydenberg, who arrived in South Australia to gloat and promote the Snowy Hydro 2 project. True to form, the Coalition politicised the event and blamed renewables for the blackouts, despite later analysis that the failures lay in transmission infrastructure and the protection software in place at the time. Undeterred, South Australia stayed the course through a change in government. Today it stands as a global poster child for renewables, alongside Denmark – an outcome that decisively rebuts years of bad-faith attacks. Meanwhile, the former Coalition’s energy responses have drifted from clownish – Scott Morrison brandishing a lump of coal in parliament – to delusional, exemplified by Peter Dutton’s nuclear proposal, which placed faith in modular reactors that, to date, have just two operational systems worldwide and a projected, expensive and unrealistic 2037 timeline.
Marie Belcredi, Epping
We should all be immensely proud of South Australia’s success with its energy transition, as it not only demonstrates that we can successfully decarbonise the grid, but also that it will save us money by doing so. The state’s feat is made even more impressive by the fact that it has no geothermal or hydroelectric capacity that could be used for energy generation or storage, and has only limited capacity to import energy from interstate. There are now no excuses for NSW, Victoria and Queensland. They need to step up their efforts so they won’t be shown up by their smaller neighbour.
Ken Enderby, Concord
Unfair attack on Albo
I was surprised to read that Parnell Palme McGuinness attributes a “politicised response to the Bondi attack” to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, rather than the opposition, and views existing hate laws as responsible for the actions of two maniacs radicalised by Islamic State ideology (“One thing might have saved the Coalition”, January 25). This and further expositions of Albanese’s sins and the failure of the Voice referendum put me forcibly in mind of White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.
Jennifer Briggs, Kilaben Bay
It is marvellous how many commentators, of which Ms McGuinness is the exemplar, know what the opposition should have done with 20/20 hindsight after the Bondi killings. The prime minister promptly announced the Richardson review (which was not mentioned in the article) while assessing the need for a royal commission. Always wise after the fact, I wonder how McGuinness would do standing for election?
Bill Johnstone, Blackheath
I almost choked on my Wheaties. Did Parnell Palme McGuinness really accuse the prime minister of a “politicised response” to the Bondi terror attack? Same “facts”, different interpretation.
Viv Mackenzie, Port Hacking
Drug busts won’t work
We’ve seen this before. Dramatic arrests of cartel drug lords (“Fugitive Olympian arrested on drug ring charges”, January 25). The trouble is that these cartels are hydra-headed. Arrest one leader and you immediately find another in their place. And why wouldn’t someone else step up when the drug trade is worth billions of dollars? The US trade is so lucrative arrests will never stop it. Has anyone not realised that prevention starts with educating potential consumers, organising halfway houses and rehabilitation facilities, etc, to eat away at the market? This is a long-term problem that won’t be solved with one arrest.
Larry Woldenberg, Forest Lodge
From our partners
Read the full article here
