Search

Readers response: What seems too expensive but is really worth the price?

We asked our readers what items or experience seem, too expensive but are really worth the price, and the response was overwhelming. Here's what our audience will always justify the price of. Robbie Kirkwood - Travel insurance. Elizabeth Foster - Business class on long haul flights. Jeanette Wallis - Coffee beans. Mandy O'Connor - A good pair of Levi jeans, and a good pair of boots. Pamela McDonald - I would say electricity! Seems lots complain about the cost until you lose power, then you realise how hard life would be without it. Tess Witchell - Real butter! Three ply toilet rolls, frappe iced coffee from McDonald’s, and proper bakery bread. Sue Yunker - Wine! Michael Schulze - A decent cup of coffee. Suzanne Jones - A holiday. Rose Niemack - Fruits and vegetables. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

To move or not to move: is it cheaper to find a new place or stay when your rent increases by 10%?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/park-thaichon-175182">Park Thaichon</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-queensland-1069">University of Southern Queensland</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sara-quach-175976">Sara Quach</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/griffith-university-828">Griffith University</a> Your landlord has just raised your rent by 10% and your mind starts running the numbers – should you cop it sweet or look to move? It’s a familiar scenario in today’s unpredictable housing market. Understanding the real costs of staying versus moving is essential for making informed choices: renters must consider hidden expenses such as moving costs, deposits and changing rental rates, giving them tools to handle rising rent pressures more effectively. <h2>A grim time for many renters</h2> National median market rents have hit record highs, reaching $627 per week, with an average annual growth rate of 9.1% during the past three years, according to real estate giant <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/Budget/reviews/2024-25/Housing#:%7E:text=Based%20on%20April%202024%20CoreLogic,the%20past%203%20calendar%20years">CoreLogic</a>. <a href="https://www.corelogic.com.au/news-research/news/2024/rent-growth-picked-up-in-the-start-of-2024,-taking-rents-to-new-record-highs">CoreLogic</a> also reported annual rental changes (houses and units) in regional Australia are not far off from the big cities: annual rent changes were 9.4% for combined capital cities, 6.4% for combined regional areas, and 8.5% nationally. So, is it better to stay or move if your rent is raised by 10%? Let’s examine the costs and benefits of each option. <h2>A breakdown of typical moving costs</h2> We’ll start with the most obvious expense: moving costs. Professional moving services aren’t cheap. For example, moving a three-bedroom house in the Gold Coast costs <a href="https://www.muval.com.au/removalists/gold-coast">$1,095.25 on average</a>, with an hourly rate of $158.26. In a bigger city like Melbourne, the cost is slightly higher at <a href="https://www.muval.com.au/removalists/melbourne">about $1,118.46</a>. The moving costs between states or cities will be more expensive if you move further away. You could choose to handle packing yourself and hire some help with a truck – a common option with businesses such as “<a href="https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-removals-storage/gold-coast/2+men+and+a+truck/k0c18643l3006035">Two Men and a Truck</a>”, which typically costs around $100 per hour. Be aware, though, that the hourly rate often starts from the moment the truck leaves the company’s warehouse until it returns. Alternatively, you can rent a van for a lower price, such as $87 for a 24-hour <a href="https://www.bunnings.com.au/for-hire-handivan-24hr-first-100kms-inc-_p5470402">Handivan rental at Bunnings</a>. Don’t forget the cost of moving boxes, too: Bunnings’ 52 litre <a href="https://www.bunnings.com.au/bunnings-52l-light-duty-moving-carton_p0517130?srsltid=AfmBOoqCYAWT0P5apPiJpoOLRAIpUCHNi63ztvIZrG5CxCoNOv45G0TV">moving cartons</a> cost $2.66 each. End-of-lease or <a href="https://firstcallhomeservices.com.au/service-menu/bond-exit-end-lease-cleaning/">bond cleaning</a> is another common expense. For a typical three-bedroom property, internal cleaning can range from $365 to $500. If you have pets, or kids who love drawing on the walls, your cleaning costs might be a bit higher. Now, let’s look at utility connection expenses that can catch people by surprise. Cancelling your internet service can be costly if you don’t meet the exit or cancellation policies. With <a href="https://www.telstra.com.au/internet/5g-home-internet">Telstra Home Internet</a>, for example, if you cancel within the first 24 months, you must return your modem within 21 days to avoid a $400 non-return fee. Most providers charge a cancellation fee or require final device repayments, typically ranging from $100 to $500, depending on the remaining contract period. As a renter, it might be wise to choose a no-lock-in contract plan to avoid these fees if you need flexibility. Electricity and gas connection and disconnection fees are usually minor but can add up, often costing about $40 to $60 for <a href="https://www.energyon.com.au/fees-and-charges/">connection and disconnection fees</a> for electricity alone. If your house uses gas for hot water or cooking, you may have to pay additional fees for setting up service. However, there are also non-financial costs, like the time spent searching for a new home, attending inspections, and putting in applications. Moving takes effort and energy for packing, transporting and unpacking. Some people feel emotionally attached to their current home, which can make leaving harder. Older renters <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1353829218311304">seem to draw strength</a> from their familiarity with, attachment to, and enjoyment of their place and community. This is something to be considered. Plus, moving can take <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41537-023-00349-w">an emotional toll</a>. <h2>The benefits of not moving</h2> The clear benefit of staying is avoiding the hassle of relocating. Staying means saving on moving expenses and avoiding the time spent searching for a new place, packing and unpacking. This may also save some people from needing to take time off work. Changing and updating an address is also another tedious task that can be avoided by staying. Moving can hit the hip pocket with “after moving costs” that people may not initially consider. For instance, a new location might mean a longer commute. If each trip adds just 15 extra minutes, that could amount to an additional 11 hours per month over 22 workdays. For drivers, increased fuel and parking expenses might also come into play. Is the current or new location closer to a supermarket, hospital, and school? This proximity could be beneficial or detrimental, depending on the surrounding environment and available services. <h2>To move or not to move?</h2> One point to note is that overall, moving costs are likely to be similar between big cities and regional areas if you get moving supplies or rent a van from a large company such as Bunnings. In the end, moving costs will be around $2,000 based on the figures above, and it can be around $800 to $1,000 cheaper if you opt to rent a van instead of using a full-service moving company. Therefore, if the current rent is $600 per week and is about to increase by 10% to $660, the additional cost would be $3,120 per year. So is it cheaper to move or stay when your rent increases by 10%? The answer is moving may save about $1,000 to $2,000, but comes with the hassle and emotional toll of relocation. Staying will be more expensive, but with less hassle and emotional strain. The right choice depends on your situation.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/243155/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/park-thaichon-175182">Park Thaichon</a>, Associate Professor of Marketing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-queensland-1069">University of Southern Queensland</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sara-quach-175976">Sara Quach</a>, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/griffith-university-828">Griffith University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-move-or-not-to-move-is-it-cheaper-to-find-a-new-place-or-stay-when-your-rent-increases-by-10-243155">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

"Misconceived": Coles and Woolies fight allegations of price gouging

Coles and Woolworths are set to fight the allegations that they have been inflating prices, as they begin their cases against the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). The lawyers for both supermarket giants appeared in the Federal Court on Wednesday after the ACCC claims the companies violated consumer law by intentionally misleading shoppers. The ACCC claim both Coles and Woolworths inflated the prices on hundred of items before placing them on sale with their "Down Down" and "Prices Dropped" campaigns. The products - including dairy, pet food and personal care - sold for less than the inflated prices, but still more than the regular price that applied before the price spike. Cameron Moore SC, representing Woolworths, told the court the supermarket had not initiated the temporary spikes in prices and would be fighting the ACCC's allegations. "The suggestion is that Woolworths initiated temporary price spikes and that's not correct factually," Moore said. "We say factually, the ACCC's case is misconceived." Both Coles and Woolworths said their increase in prices came at the demand of suppliers, who pushed for the increase due to their rising costs. John Sheahan KC, representing Coles, said the case was not as simple as alleged by the ACCC and any outcome could have significant implications for the whole industry. Coles and Woolworths have until November 29th to file a written response to the ACCC's allegations, before both parties return to the Federal Court in December for another case management hearing. Image credits: Shutterstock

Legal

Coles and Woolies shoppers could claim thousands over alleged deceptive pricing

Coles and Woolworths shoppers could claim up to $5,000 if the supermarket giants are found out for deceiving customers with dodgy pricing tactics, according to a leading lawyer. Carter Capner Law is one of two firms investigating whether a class action suit on behalf of shoppers is viable in conjunction with the ACCC's legal action against the two chains. Both Coles and Woolworths have bee accused of violating Australian consumer law by the consumer watchdog after allegedly intentionally misleading customers by driving up prices and then putting those items on sale for their original prices under the "Prices Dropped" and "Down Down" campaigns. “Early estimates suggest that households could claim between $2,000 and $5,000, depending on the amount spent and the impact of the deceptive pricing,” law director Peter Carter said, who began advocating for people after he received an "avalanche of calls from outraged customers". While Carter said the firm initially had no plans to commence a class action, he admitted that after speaking about it to the media, the company were inundated with Coles and Woolworths customers "demanding action and compensation". He believes Australians already doing it tough through the cost of living crisis felt "betrayed" by the supermarkets, while Flinders University research fellow in law Dr Joel Lisk said that the class action is "a positive" for shoppers. "The ACCC proceedings aren't about getting refunds for customers," he told Yahoo. "But if they are successful it would mean customers have, in theory, been misled and deceived and could be entitled to damages." When it comes to damages, it's something Dr Lisk said "starts to add up" for customers, although it's "hard to say" if financial penalties to businesses found guilty of wrongdoing would impact misleading and deceptive conduct in the future. "If [fines are] seen as just the cost of doing business it doesn't really dissuade businesses from engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct," he said. "Seeking damages from business for the losses that individuals like us have incurred is one way of doing that. But of course, we're talking probably about dollars and cents in transactions when businesses like Coles and Woolworths deal in the billions." Image credits: Shutterstock

Legal

"Can you sleep at night?" Frustrated shopper confronts Woolies CEO over price gouging

A frustrated Woolworths shopper has called out the supermarket's CEO in store to demand answers about Woolies' record-breaking profits during the cost of living crisis. Chief executive Amanda Bardwell was walking around a Woolworths store in Wollongong when the heated exchange took place, with the whole thing captured on camera. The customer fired off hard-hitting questions to the CEO and other senior staff members, asking, "What do you have to say to the fact that your company is profiting off price gouging during the cost of living crisis?" Ms Bardwell, looking visibly shocked by the confrontation, replied, "Thank you for reaching out to us, we're doing everything we can to recognise that customers are doing it tough to make sure that they're able to get great prices." The woman didn't accept her answer, firing back, "I really don't believe that. Millions of people in Australia right now have to skip meals in order to survive, while you continue to make big bucks and working class people suffer. Can you sleep at night knowing that?" Ms Bardwell replied, "Our team are doing everything that we can to support our customers. We understand that it is an incredibly difficult time right now." A staff member then intervened, adding, "We have lowered prices and you see that right throughout our store… that's great value for our customers." Ms Bardwell thanked the customer for sharing her views and said Woolworths was doing "everything we can" to keep prices low for customers, before another staff member chimed in to say "It's actually illegal to film people in NSW without permission, with the CEO walking away. Social media users were quick to praise the woman for confronting Miss Bardwell, while sharing their own stories of being stung by hefty supermarket prices. "I'm sick of paying nearly $300 a week on groceries. That's choosing the cheapest products. My fridge still looks half empty when I unpack," one said. "I'm sure Coles and Woolworth management don't have cost of living crisis as they are getting bigger and bigger bonus year after year," a second wrote. Others took aim at one particular comment in the video, pointing out, "'It’s illegal to film in NSW without permission', yet Woolworths has how many cameras in every store? Cameras in people’s faces in self serve on every screen. Did they get our permission?" Another added, "If only their empathy was as big as their prices." Image credits: TikTok

Legal

How to revive your curls without paying salon prices

Maintaining curly hair takes a lot of time and effort and sometimes no matter what you do, the frizz just cannot be tamed. While getting your hair done at the salon can be a treat, having to pay salon prices to get softness, shine and definition for your curls is just not sustainable in the long run. Enter <a href="https://www.johnfrieda.com/en-au/home/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">John Frieda</a>'s newest Frizz Ease Miraculous Recovery range, which is now infused with repairing ceramides designed to transform frizzy and damaged hair. The Miraculous Recovery Repairing shampoo and conditioner are two of my personal faves, as I could feel the difference in how soft my hair felt after the first use. Not only are the products safe for colour-treated hair, they also made my curls more manageable and easy to style, with the effects lasting for two days, which is amazing considering how quickly my curls can go limp. I also loved how subtle the scent was, and found the most effective way of applying the conditioner was to comb it through my hair with a detangling brush in the shower, as it helps distribute the product evenly. While different curls all need slightly different care, I found the shampoo provided the perfect balance of cleaning build-up on my hair without leaving it dry or flaky. The star of the range was definitely the All-in-1 extra strength serum, which provided extra protection for my colour-treated and chemically treated hair. I love that you can apply this product through wet or dry hair, and it was the perfect way to revive my curls. The Finishing Creme was a bit too thick for my fine, curly hair, but for those with tighter curls or those looking for some extra moisture during more humid days, a light layer of the product would surely tame any flyaways or frizz. With most of their products retailing for around $20 it is an affordable solution to bringing life back into colour-treated and damaged curls. The product can be found in all major supermarkets and pharmacies across <a href="https://www.chemistwarehouse.com.au/shop-online/5571/john-frieda-haircare" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AU</a> and <a href="https://www.chemistwarehouse.co.nz/shop-online/5571/john-frieda-haircare" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NZ</a>. Images: Supplied

Beauty & Style

Aussies outraged over price of staple snack

Australians have expressed outrage over the price of Tim Tams, after one Reddit user spotted the staple snack being sold in stores and online for $6 per pack. “I (remember) when a double pack used to only be about $4.50. F**k this shit,” the user who posted the photo stated. Others blasted the price hike as excessive and "un-Australian". One commenter pointed out that the iconic Australian biscuit was potentially cheaper overseas, despite the import taxes. “That’s in Australia? They’re half that in Canada and they have to import them from Australia,” one said. “Like many other shrunken and quality reduced products I can live without them," another added. Arnott's traditional flavours are currently listed at $6 in Coles and Woolworths, while a family packet will set buyers back $7. An Arnott's spokesperson told the Daily Mail that the price hike was due to increased input costs. “Like most Australian manufacturers, we are experiencing a significant increase in our input costs, including the surging price of cocoa," the spokesperson said. “This has led us to make the difficult decision to increase the price of our Tim Tam biscuits. “We continue to invest in promotional programs with our retailers year-round, to ensure consumers can buy our products at great value prices. ‘The changes are necessary for Arnott’s to remain competitive as an Australian manufacturer and to continue to make the delicious products Australians know and love.” Image: Reddit

Money & Banking

Old grocery receipt highlights extortionate increase at supermarkets

An old Woolworths receipt from 2021 has revealed the grim reality of increased grocery prices, and how inflation has crippled many in just a few short years. A social media user on X, formerly Twitter, shared her receipt from a Melbourne Woolworths as she highlighted how much more common household items cost today. She said it showed how Aussies were shelling out for costs that appear to have moved well past official inflation levels, which rose to 3.8 per cent by the end of June. “We all knew we’re being ripped off! Australians are now paying up to 200% more for basic grocery items than they were a few years ago!” she wrote. “Oh but inflations (sic) currently back at around 3.8% … yeah my ass it is!!” <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Found an old Woolworths receipt circa 2021. We all knew we re being ripped off! Australians are now paying up to 200% more for basic grocery items than they were a few years ago! Oh but inflations currently back at around 3.8% … yeh my ass it is!! Pink Lady Apply $2.90kg… <a href="https://t.co/9OPS6SnOqI">pic.twitter.com/9OPS6SnOqI</a> — Miss Madeleine (@MadsMelbourne) <a href="https://twitter.com/MadsMelbourne/status/1832282784431534448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 7, 2024</a></blockquote> Her docket shows how everyday items like coffee grounds, potato chips and stain removers have skyrocketed in price. In the receipt items such as a 250g packet of Bega cheese is priced at $4.50 – it’s now $6 for the same item, discounted from $7.50 according to online pricing. Deli fresh Champagne leg ham sold for $2.50 for 100g according to the receipt, while current prices put that at $4.20. Ozkleen prewash power stain remover is now currently listed as $7 for a 500ml bottle, more than 200 per cent higher than the $2.75 it sold for three years ago. The woman also posted another smaller receipt from the same year, in which she bought grapes and a watermelon. In addition to sharing the image, she wrote, "Another one to add! No wonder Australia is having a cost of living crises! Woolworths Receipt circa 2021. Grapes were $3.50kg, now $14.16 = 304% increase. Watermelon was $1.50 now $6.38kg = 325% increase." Grocery prices have come under the spotlight amid the cost-of-living crisis, with the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission tasked with probing the sector. “We know grocery prices have become a major concern for the millions of Australians experiencing cost of living pressures,” ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said in January. “When it comes to fresh produce, we understand that many farmers are concerned about weak correlation between the price they receive for their produce and the price consumers pay at the checkout.” Coles and Woolworths have defended the price rises as being pushed by supply chain struggles, while both companies posted profits of more than $1 billion in the last financial year. A spokesperson for Woolworths also released a statement saying "Ongoing economy-wide inflation means it costs more for many supermarket suppliers to manufacture their products than it did a few years ago. "We remain focussed on delivering lower prices where we can, with our average prices coming down in the last six months, and thousands of specials every week. "The price of fruit and vegetables can vary throughout the year due to weather, seasonality, supply and demand. For example, Haas avocados are currently not in season." Image credits: X / Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Does intermittent fasting increase or decrease our risk of cancer?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amali-cooray-1482458">Amali Cooray</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research) </a> Research over the years has suggested intermittent fasting has the potential to improve our health and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3946160/">reduce the likelihood</a> of developing cancer. So what should we make of a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07840-z">new study</a> in mice suggesting fasting increases the risk of cancer? <h2>What is intermittent fasting?</h2> Intermittent fasting means switching between times of eating and not eating. Unlike traditional diets that focus on what to eat, this approach focuses on when to eat. There are lots of commonly used <a href="https://dietitiansaustralia.org.au/health-advice/intermittent-fasting">intermittent fasting schedules</a>. The 16/8 plan means you only eat within an eight-hour window, then fast for the remaining 16 hours. Another popular option is the 5:2 diet, where you eat normally for five days then restrict calories for two days. In Australia, poor diet contributes to <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/topics/food-and-nutrition/what-were-doing">7% of all cases of disease</a>, including coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and cancers of the bowel and lung. Globally, poor diet is linked to <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(19)30041-8/fulltext">22% of deaths</a> in adults over the age of 25. Intermittent fasting has gained a lot of attention in recent years for its potential health benefits. Fasting <a href="https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/metabolism">influences metabolism</a>, which is how your body processes food and energy. It can affect how the body absorbs nutrients from food and burns energy from sugar and fat. <h2>What did the new study find?</h2> The <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07840-z">new study</a>, published in Nature, found when mice ate again after fasting, their <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s12276-024-01179-1">gut stem cells</a>, which help repair the intestine, became more active. The stem cells were better at regenerating compared with those of mice who were either totally fasting or eating normally. This suggests the body might be better at healing itself when eating after fasting. However, this could also have a downside. If there are <a href="https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/genetics/genetic-changes-infographic">genetic mutations</a> present, the burst of stem cell-driven regeneration after eating again might make it easier for cancer to develop. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4027058/">Polyamines</a> – small molecules important for cell growth – drive this regeneration after refeeding. These polyamines can be produced by the body, influenced by diet, or come from gut bacteria. The findings suggest that while fasting and refeeding can improve stem cell function and regeneration, there might be a tradeoff with an increased risk of cancer, especially if fasting and refeeding cycles are repeated over time. While this has been shown in mice, the link between intermittent fasting and cancer risk in humans is more complicated and not yet fully understood. <h2>What has other research found?</h2> <a href="https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-nutr-071816-064634">Studies in animals</a> have found intermittent fasting can help with weight loss, improve blood pressure and blood sugar levels, and subsequently <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27810402/">reduce the risks</a> of diabetes and heart disease. Research in humans <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2811116">suggests</a> intermittent fasting can reduce body weight, improve <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9361187/">metabolic health</a>, reduce inflammation, and enhance <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3946160/">cellular repair processes</a>, which remove damaged cells that could potentially turn cancerous. However, other studies warn that the benefits of intermittent fasting are the same as what can be achieved through <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2623528">calorie restriction</a>, and that there <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2161831322007542">isn’t enough evidence</a> to confirm it reduces cancer risk in humans. <h2>What about in people with cancer?</h2> In studies of people who have cancer, fasting has been <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2815756/">reported to</a> protect against the side effects of chemotherapy and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7311547/">improve the effectiveness</a> of cancer treatments, while decreasing damage to healthy cells. Prolonged fasting in some patients who have cancer has been shown to be safe and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34383300/">may potentially</a> be able to decrease tumour growth. On the other hand, some experts advise caution. Studies in mice show intermittent fasting could <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-023-01033-w">weaken the immune system</a> and make the body less able to fight infection, potentially leading to worse health outcomes in people who are unwell. However, there is <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8757987/">currently no evidence</a> that fasting increases the risk of bacterial infections in humans. <h2>So is it OK to try intermittent fasting?</h2> The current view on intermittent fasting is that it can be beneficial, but experts agree more research is needed. Short-term benefits such as weight loss and better overall health are well supported. But we don’t fully understand the long-term effects, especially when it comes to cancer risk and other immune-related issues. Since there are many different methods of intermittent fasting and people react to them differently, it’s hard to <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-023-01033-w">give advice that works for everyone</a>. And because most people who participated in the studies were overweight, or had diabetes or other health problems, we don’t know how the results apply to the broader population. For healthy people, intermittent fasting is generally considered safe. But it’s <a href="https://dietitiansaustralia.org.au/health-advice/intermittent-fasting">not suitable for everyone</a>, particularly those with certain medical conditions, pregnant or breastfeeding women, and people with a history of eating disorders. So consult your health-care provider before starting any fasting program.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/238071/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amali-cooray-1482458">Amali Cooray</a>, PhD Candidate in Genetic Engineering and Cancer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research)</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-intermittent-fasting-increase-or-decrease-our-risk-of-cancer-238071">original article</a>. </div>

Body

Constipation increases your risk of a heart attack, new study finds – and not just on the toilet

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/vincent-ho-141549">Vincent Ho</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> If you Google the terms “constipation” and “heart attack” it’s not long before the name Elvis Presley crops up. Elvis had a longstanding history of chronic constipation and <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/elvis-addiction-was-the-perfect-prescription-for-an-early-death">it’s believed</a> he was straining very hard to poo, which then led to a fatal heart attack. We don’t know what really happened to the so-called King of Rock “n” Roll back in 1977. There were likely several contributing factors to his death, and this theory is one of many. But after this famous case researchers took a strong interest in the link between constipation and the risk of a heart attack. This includes a recent <a href="https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/ajpheart.00519.2024">study</a> led by Australian researchers involving data from thousands of people. <h2>Are constipation and heart attacks linked?</h2> Large <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-38068-y">population</a> <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32873621/">studies</a> show constipation is linked to an increased risk of heart attacks. For example, an <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-38068-y">Australian study</a> involved more than 540,000 people over 60 in hospital for a range of conditions. It found constipated patients had a higher risk of high blood pressure, heart attacks and strokes compared to non-constipated patients of the same age. A <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32873621/">Danish study</a> of more than 900,000 people from hospitals and hospital outpatient clinics also found that people who were constipated had an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. It was unclear, however, if this relationship between constipation and an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes would hold true for healthy people outside hospital. These Australian and Danish studies also did not factor in the effects of drugs used to treat high blood pressure (hypertension), which can make you constipated. <h2>How about this new study?</h2> The recent <a href="https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/ajpheart.00519.2024">international study</a> led by Monash University researchers found a connection between constipation and an increased risk of heart attacks, strokes and heart failure in a general population. The researchers analysed data from the <a href="https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk">UK Biobank</a>, a database of health-related information from about half a million people in the United Kingdom. The researchers identified more than 23,000 cases of constipation and accounted for the effect of drugs to treat high blood pressure, which can lead to constipation. People with constipation (identified through medical records or via a questionnaire) were twice as likely to have a heart attack, stroke or heart failure as those without constipation. The researchers found a strong link between high blood pressure and constipation. Individuals with hypertension who were also constipated had a 34% increased risk of a major heart event compared to those with just hypertension. The study only looked at the data from people of European ancestry. However, there is good reason to believe the link between constipation and heart attacks applies to other populations. A <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26812003/">Japanese study</a> looked at more than 45,000 men and women in the general population. It found people passing a bowel motion once every two to three days had a higher risk of dying from heart disease compared with ones who passed at least one bowel motion a day. <h2>How might constipation cause a heart attack?</h2> Chronic constipation can lead to straining when passing a stool. This can result in <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">laboured breathing</a> and can lead to a rise in blood pressure. In <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">one Japanese study</a> including ten elderly people, blood pressure was high just before passing a bowel motion and continued to rise during the bowel motion. This increase in blood pressure lasted for an hour afterwards, a pattern not seen in younger Japanese people. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">One theory</a> is that older people have stiffer blood vessels due to atherosclerosis (thickening or hardening of the arteries caused by a build-up of plaque) and other age-related changes. So their high blood pressure can persist for some time after straining. But the blood pressure of younger people returns quickly to normal as they have more elastic blood vessels. As blood pressure rises, the risk of heart disease increases. The risk of developing heart disease <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12493255/">doubles</a> when systolic blood pressure (the top number in your blood pressure reading) rises permanently by 20 mmHg (millimetres of mercury, a standard measure of blood pressure). The systolic blood pressure rise with straining in passing a stool has been <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">reported to be</a> as high as 70 mmHg. This rise is only temporary but with persistent straining in chronic constipation this could lead to an increased risk of heart attacks. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22256893/">Some people</a> with chronic constipation may have an impaired function of their vagus nerve, which controls various bodily functions, including digestion, heart rate and breathing. This impaired function can result in abnormalities of heart rate and over-activation of the flight-fight response. This can, in turn, lead to elevated blood pressure. Another intriguing avenue of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6399019/">research</a> examines the imbalance in gut bacteria in people with <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3596341/">constipation</a>. This imbalance, known as dysbiosis, can result in microbes and other substances leaking through the gut barrier into the bloodstream and triggering an immune response. This, in turn, can lead to low-grade inflammation in the blood circulation and arteries becoming stiffer, increasing the risk of a heart attack. This latest study also explored genetic links between constipation and heart disease. The researchers found shared genetic factors that underlie both constipation and heart disease. <h2>What can we do about this?</h2> Constipation affects around <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36826591/">19% of the global population</a> aged 60 and older. So there is a substantial portion of the population at an increased risk of heart disease due to their bowel health. Managing chronic constipation through dietary changes (particularly increased dietary fibre), increased physical activity, ensuring adequate hydration and using medications, if necessary, are all important ways to help improve bowel function and reduce the risk of heart disease.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237209/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/vincent-ho-141549">Vincent Ho</a>, Associate Professor and clinical academic gastroenterologist, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/constipation-increases-your-risk-of-a-heart-attack-new-study-finds-and-not-just-on-the-toilet-237209">original article</a>. </div>

Body

Does eating ham, bacon and beef really increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/duane-mellor-136502">Duane Mellor</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/aston-university-1107">Aston University</a> That lunchtime staple, the humble ham sandwich, has come in for a bashing in the press recently. According to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/aug/20/two-slices-of-ham-a-day-can-raise-type-2-diabetes-risk-by-15-research-suggests">many</a> <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13761253/Eating-ham-daily-linked-increase-risk-diabetes.html">reports</a>, eating two slices of ham a day can increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes. But what’s the science behind these headlines? The research offers a more complex picture. <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(24)00179-7/fulltext">A new study</a> from the University of Cambridge highlighted an association between developing type 2 diabetes and eating processed meat like ham and bacon, and red meat such as beef and lamb. This led to headlines suggesting the risk was mainly linked to <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/21/ham-sandwich-processed-meat-fresh-risk-link-type-2-diabetes/">ham sandwiches</a>. This seems to have come from the <a href="https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/red-and-processed-meat-consumption-associated-with-higher-type-2-diabetes-risk">press release</a>, which used ham as the example to quantify the amount of processed meat associated with a 15% increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes over ten years. The research found that this risk was linked to eating an extra 50g of processed meat every day, which happens to equate to two slices of ham. A useful example thus appears to have been taken up by the media as the main cause, perhaps ignoring some of the key messages coming from the study. So, can processed and red meat really increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes? The <a href="https://www.diabetes.org.uk/diabetes-the-basics/types-of-diabetes/type-2/diabetes-risk-factors">biggest risk factors</a> linked to developing type 2 diabetes are being over 40, having family members with type 2 diabetes, being of South Asian or African descent, or having a higher body weight – and especially a larger waist. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EsOBcx2bJqU?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> The Cambridge study used data from nearly 2 million people from 31 studies. Participants were followed for an average of ten years. During this time, around one in 20 people developed type 2 diabetes. The research suggested that a 10% increase in the probability of developing type 2 diabetes was associated with every 100g of additional red meat eaten daily. Eating half as much extra processed meat every day was linked to an even greater increased risk of developing the disease. This is not the <a href="https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165(23)66119-2/abstract">first time</a> that both processed and red meats have been linked with an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes. However, the key strength of the Cambridge study was that it tried to control for many of the other factors linked to the disease, including smoking, having a higher body weight, dietary intake and exercise. However, the size of the increased risk is modest, considering few people included in the study ate 50g or more processed meat per day – meaning moderate ham consumption is likely to have <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9908545/">no meaningful effect</a> on your risk. <h2>What’s the link?</h2> Processed meat has been linked to increased risk of type 2 diabetes because of its nitrate and salt content – additives that are used to cure many processed meats. Nitrates and salt in processed meats have also <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6893523/">been linked to</a> an increased risk of developing colon cancer. In fact, the World Health Organization classifies the additives as <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/cancer-carcinogenicity-of-the-consumption-of-red-meat-and-processed-meat">group 1 carcinogens</a>, which means they can cause a range of cancers. The mechanism linking processed meat to cancer seems to be similar to how it might be linked to type 2 diabetes. During digestion, processed meat produces <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6294997/">N-nitroso chemicals</a>, which can damage cells. This can lead to inflammation and affects how insulin, the hormone that controls blood glucose (sugar), works. This in turn can lead to <a href="https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/diabetes/overview/what-is-diabetes/prediabetes-insulin-resistance">insulin resistance</a>, when cells in your muscles, fat and liver don’t respond well to insulin and can’t easily take up glucose from your blood. Red meat, meanwhile, is <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/healthy-iron-rich-foods">rich in iron</a>. Research suggests that people with <a href="https://www.diabetes.org.uk/diabetes-the-basics/related-conditions/haemochromatosis-diabetes#:%7E:text=So%20a%20rise%20of%20iron,GP%20as%20soon%20as%20possible.">high levels of iron</a> are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes. However, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8744124/#:%7E:text=The%20WHO%20has%20recognised%20iron,being%20affected%20with%20this%20condition.">low levels of iron</a> are more of a health concern for the general population. Another potential link regarding red meat could be the way it is cooked. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5521980/">Previous studies</a> have suggested that charred meat, cooked over an open flame or at high temperature, is also linked to an increased risk of developing <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5911789/">type 2 diabetes</a>. Charring meat leads to formation of toxic chemicals such as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/pharmacology-toxicology-and-pharmaceutical-science/heterocyclic-amine#:%7E:text=Heterocyclic%20amines%20are%20aromatic%20compounds,of%20reactions%20called%20Maillard%20reactions.">heterocyclic aromatic amines</a> and harmful compounds like <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/advanced-glycation-end-products">advanced glycation end products</a>, both of which have been linked to <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21709297/">insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes</a>. <h2>Bye-bye barbecues and bacon butties?</h2> The key message is reduction, rather than avoidance. The UK government nutritional recommendations offer sound advice: limit your combined intake of red and processed meat to no more than <a href="https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/food-types/meat-nutrition/#:%7E:text=Red%20meat%20and%20processed%20meat&text=If%20you%20currently%20eat%20more,%2C%20veal%2C%20venison%20and%20goat.">an average of 70g per day</a>. But these guidelines also suggest that red meat can be a valuable source of iron. So, if you decide to stop eating red meat, you should eat alternative sources of iron such as beans, lentils, dark green vegetables and fortified cereals. This needs to be done as part of a carefully planned diet. Non-meat sources of iron are more difficult for our bodies to absorb so should be eaten with a source of vitamin C, found in green vegetables and citrus fruit. The best advice to reduce your risk of developing type 2 diabetes is to maintain a healthy weight – consider losing weight if you have a higher body weight – and be as physically active as possible. A healthy diet should be based on plenty of vegetables, fruit, beans, peas, lentils, nuts and seeds, along with some wholegrain foods, some dairy products, fish and white meat (or vegetarian alternatives) – plus moderate amounts of red meat and minimal processed meat. This will help reduce your risk of type 2 diabetes, <a href="https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/support/healthy-living/healthy-eating">heart disease</a>, and <a href="https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/diet-and-cancer/does-having-a-healthy-diet-reduce-my-risk-of-cancer">many cancers</a> – as well being more <a href="https://www.bda.uk.com/static/539e2268-7991-4d24-b9ee867c1b2808fc/a1283104-a0dd-476b-bda723452ae93870/one%20blue%20dot%20reference%20guide.pdf">environmentally sustainable</a>. But if you have a penchant for ham sandwiches, rest assured you can continue to indulge as an occasional treat. It’s your overall lifestyle and diet that really matter for your health and risk of developing type 2 diabetes.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237346/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/duane-mellor-136502">Duane Mellor</a>, Visiting Academic, Aston Medical School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/aston-university-1107">Aston University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-eating-ham-bacon-and-beef-really-increase-your-risk-of-developing-type-2-diabetes-237346">original article</a>. </div>

Body

How long does back pain last? And how can learning about pain increase the chance of recovery?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-wallwork-1361569">Sarah Wallwork</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lorimer-moseley-1552">Lorimer Moseley</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Back pain is common. One in thirteen people have it right now and worldwide a staggering 619 million people will <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186678/">have it this year</a>. Chronic pain, of which back pain is the most common, is the world’s <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186678/">most disabling</a> health problem. Its economic impact <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK92510/">dwarfs other health conditions</a>. If you get back pain, how long will it take to go away? We scoured the scientific literature to <a href="https://www.cmaj.ca/content/cmaj/196/2/E29.full.pdf">find out</a>. We found data on almost 20,000 people, from 95 different studies and split them into three groups: <ul> <li>acute – those with back pain that started less than six weeks ago</li> <li>subacute – where it started between six and 12 weeks ago</li> <li>chronic – where it started between three months and one year ago.</li> </ul> We found 70%–95% of people with acute back pain were likely to recover within six months. This dropped to 40%–70% for subacute back pain and to 12%–16% for chronic back pain. Clinical guidelines point to graded return to activity and pain education under the guidance of a health professional as the best ways to promote recovery. Yet these effective interventions are underfunded and hard to access. <h2>More pain doesn’t mean a more serious injury</h2> Most acute back pain episodes are <a href="https://www.racgp.org.au/getattachment/75af0cfd-6182-4328-ad23-04ad8618920f/attachment.aspx">not caused</a> by serious injury or disease. There are rare exceptions, which is why it’s wise to see your doctor or physio, who can check for signs and symptoms that warrant further investigation. But unless you have been in a significant accident or sustained a large blow, you are unlikely to have caused much damage to your spine. Even very minor back injuries can be brutally painful. This is, in part, because of how we are made. If you think of your spinal cord as a very precious asset (which it is), worthy of great protection (which it is), a bit like the crown jewels, then what would be the best way to keep it safe? Lots of protection and a highly sensitive alarm system. The spinal cord is protected by strong bones, thick ligaments, powerful muscles and a highly effective alarm system (your nervous system). This alarm system can trigger pain that is so unpleasant that you cannot possibly think of, let alone do, anything other than seek care or avoid movement. The messy truth is that when pain persists, the pain system becomes more sensitive, so a widening array of things contribute to pain. This pain system hypersensitivity is a result of neuroplasticity – your nervous system is becoming better at making pain. <h2>Reduce your chance of lasting pain</h2> Whether or not your pain resolves is not determined by the extent of injury to your back. We don’t know all the factors involved, but we do know there are things that you can do to reduce chronic back pain: <ul> <li> understand how pain really works. This will involve intentionally learning about modern pain science and care. It will be difficult but rewarding. It will help you work out what you can do to change your pain </li> <li> reduce your pain system sensitivity. With guidance, patience and persistence, you can learn how to gradually retrain your pain system back towards normal. </li> </ul> <h2>How to reduce your pain sensitivity and learn about pain</h2> Learning about “how pain works” provides the most sustainable <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj-2021-067718">improvements in chronic back pain</a>. Programs that combine pain education with graded brain and body exercises (gradual increases in movement) can reduce pain system sensitivity and help you return to the life you want. These programs have been in development for years, but high-quality clinical trials <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2794765">are now emerging</a> and it’s good news: they show most people with chronic back pain improve and many completely recover. But most clinicians aren’t equipped to deliver these effective programs – <a href="https://www.jpain.org/article/S1526-5900(23)00618-1/fulltext">good pain education</a> is not taught in most medical and health training degrees. Many patients still receive ineffective and often risky and expensive treatments, or keep seeking temporary pain relief, hoping for a cure. When health professionals don’t have adequate pain education training, they can deliver bad pain education, which leaves patients feeling like they’ve just <a href="https://www.jpain.org/article/S1526-5900(23)00618-1/fulltext">been told it’s all in their head</a>. Community-driven not-for-profit organisations such as <a href="https://www.painrevolution.org/">Pain Revolution</a> are training health professionals to be good pain educators and raising awareness among the general public about the modern science of pain and the best treatments. Pain Revolution has partnered with dozens of health services and community agencies to train more than <a href="https://www.painrevolution.org/find-a-lpe">80 local pain educators</a> and supported them to bring greater understanding and improved care to their colleagues and community. But a broader system-wide approach, with government, industry and philanthropic support, is needed to expand these programs and fund good pain education. To solve the massive problem of chronic back pain, effective interventions need to be part of standard care, not as a last resort after years of increasing pain, suffering and disability.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222513/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-wallwork-1361569">Sarah Wallwork</a>, Post-doctoral Researcher, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lorimer-moseley-1552">Lorimer Moseley</a>, Professor of Clinical Neurosciences and Foundation Chair in Physiotherapy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-long-does-back-pain-last-and-how-can-learning-about-pain-increase-the-chance-of-recovery-222513">original article</a>. </div>

Body

Readers response: What are your thoughts on the increasing use of digital payments?

While technology continues to advance, so does the way we pay for things. Many shopping outlets have turned to using digital payment methods rather than cash, which has divided many who find it easier to use cold hard cash than rely on technology. We asked our readers their thoughts on digital payments and the response was overwhelming. Here's what they said. Joan Hughes - Couldn’t go shopping due to bad pains in my leg and back, so my grandson did an online shop. Tried to use my card 5 times but wouldn’t accept it, so had to use my granddaughter's. This is the 3rd time my card has been rejected. Rubbish system, cash is definitely best. Johanna Shakes - Very hard to adjust for elderly. Debra Walker - Hate it! Cash is king. Lex Jordan - I think we should all stand and boycott these companies that don't accept cash. Patricia Tebbit - Don't mind using cards but access to cash is imperative. Think of small charity raffles, garage sales & countless other things where cash is required. Lyn Bradford - I love it, I use 95% card, 5% cash. So much easier. David Taylor - Just making it easier for hackers. Jennifer Bucktin - Cash is best. If digital goes down, you can't use anything. Steve Smith - The digital age is here to stay so it's going to be better for all to get used to it. Quentin Brown - Love them both, digital and cash as it's much easier to pay bills etc. Of course you have to be smart and not gullible. Why can't we have both? Kath Sheppard - Cash is king, a lot safer as well, can't overspend either or be charged fees. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

What is competition, and why is it so important for prices?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-blacklow-1546097">Paul Blacklow</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-tasmania-888">University of Tasmania</a> It’s hard to remember a time before the <a href="https://theconversation.com/you-dont-have-to-be-an-economist-to-know-australia-is-in-a-cost-of-living-crisis-what-are-the-signs-and-what-needs-to-change-210373">cost-of-living crisis</a> dominated news headlines. Most of us would certainly like it to be over. But the fundamental question at its heart – which points to the problem we have to solve – seems simple. What determines the prices we pay? The cost of producing goods and services is certainly one big factor in determining how much we pay for them. So, too, is what we’re prepared to fork out. But when we talk about lowering prices, we often also talk about increasing competition – the number of firms vying to sell us a particular offering. It’s so important for efficient pricing that the government body tasked with making our markets fair is called the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission – the “ACCC” for short. But why does having more people trying to sell us things drive down their prices? And can companies find ways to get around this? <h2>More sellers, lower prices</h2> In a free market system, there are a few different types of competition. In the most ideal, a perfectly competitive market, firms must use resources efficiently to produce what we consumers want at the lowest possible cost. In perfect competition: <ul> <li>the products and services traded are identical (or very similar)</li> <li>there are many buyers and sellers</li> <li>information is perfect</li> <li>firms can enter and exit freely.</li> </ul> A firm charging prices well above the minimum cost will sell no goods or services and be forced to leave the market. Why? Because its competitors will be able to steal customers by charging slightly less for exactly the same thing. Only lower-cost firms will remain and compete prices down until they cover the lowest cost of supplying the good or service, plus an average or normal “return on capital”. At a high level, think of this return as an acceptable monetary reward for the business for investing the inputs and taking on the risks required to operate. If ever an industry is earning above-average returns given its level of risk, new firms will enter and charge less, until only normal returns are earned. Conversely, below-normal profits will see firms exit, decreasing supply and raising prices. Do perfectly competitive markets exist? There are arguably some examples that come close, such as casual labour services, some agricultural commodities like grain, livestock and fruit, and financial and currency markets. But there are more examples of less competitive markets. <h2>The winner takes it all</h2> At the opposite extreme, in monopoly markets, there is only one seller of a good or service. Typically, there is some barrier preventing new firms from entering the market and driving prices down. Without government regulation, monopoly firms will reduce supply, increase prices and earn above-normal profit levels. However, sometimes monopolies emerge naturally because it is far more efficient to have a single coordinating supplier of a particular service – such as in letter delivery, rail tracks, or internet infrastructure. To strike a balance, governments typically regulate or own monopolies. <h2>Same same, but different</h2> More common than monopoly is what’s called monopolistic competition, which is the market structure for many of our tech, entertainment and dining goods and services. In monopolistic competition, firms try to make their offering different by investing in R&D and advertising, so that they do not have to compete on price alone. Think Apple’s iPhone versus Samsung’s Galaxy. Both are technically the same kind of product, but have created their own unique markets. Differentiation allows firms to price above minimum cost and earn above-normal rates of return. At least, that is, until new firms enter and imitate them, increasing supply and lowering prices and profits to normal levels. <h2>A few big players hold market power</h2> In Australia, many key goods and services are traded in oligopoly markets. Oligopolies arise when a few large firms dominate a particular industry, such as supermarkets, domestic airlines, banking, mobile telecommunications, and petrol retailing. Some oligopoly markets are very competitive and drive prices down to cost, plus normal return to capital. But in other more concentrated markets with a few powerful firms, firms may have significant market power and be able to keep prices above the competitive level. It is not illegal to possess market power, but according to Australia’s Competition and Consumer Act 2010, it is illegal to use it “for the purpose, effect, or likely effect of substantially lessening competition”. It is illegal, for example, for firms to explicitly work together when setting prices. This is called collusion. Neither can they force suppliers to deal with them exclusively, or set prices below cost when new firms attempt to enter a market. But that doesn’t mean some firms haven’t learned subtle and legal ways of reducing competition. For example, loyalty programs and charging special loss-leading prices can seem at first glance to be good for consumers, but can also increase the <a href="https://theconversation.com/loyalty-programs-may-limit-competition-and-they-could-be-pushing-prices-up-for-everyone-220669">cost of switching</a> to the lowest-priced firm. <h2>Are we getting a good deal?</h2> Still, you may have noticed the prices charged for many goods and services are very similar across different firms in the economy. Have these prices been driven down by competition to their cost plus a normal return to capital? Or are firms abusing their market power to lessen competition in the market? What can we do if firms are reducing competition through legal measures? These are just some of the difficult questions both government and industry are currently grappling with.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/234082/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-blacklow-1546097">Paul Blacklow</a>, Lecturer in Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-tasmania-888">University of Tasmania</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-competition-and-why-is-it-so-important-for-prices-234082">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Young Aussies hit back at Steve Price for calling them "lazy"

Young Aussies have hit back at Steve Price after being criticised as lazy by the broadcaster. Prince unleashed at younger generations on The Project while they were discussing the campaign for more leave initiated by the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association, which is pushing to increase annual leave to five weeks a year. The union hopes to ease burnout in employees, and Price was not impressed with the calls for extra leave. "We're trying to get productivity up in this country," he said. "So we've got people refusing to go back to the office, working from home in barely washed tracksuit tops and bottoms, three days a week. "And now they want five weeks holiday." Georgie Tunny, a millennial, hit back at the boomer by arguing that the "work culture" has changed, especially among those new to the workforce. "Especially for the younger generations, they see work completely differently," she said. Price interrupted her saying that young Aussies just did not want to "work very hard", to which Tunny replied: "There's been a death of your job as your identity or career." Social media users were quick to back Tunny, and took aim at Price. "Where's the incentive for young people to work hard when working hard won't buy you a house or even afford you basic veggies," one said. "You get what you pay for, and it's not worth it to work hard. There's literally no benefit to working as hard as you can," another added. "When you're priced out of the market, priced out of holidays and priced out of necessities, what motivation is there to care or be productive," another added. Others suggested that employers should "increase wages and introduce bonuses as incentives," to encourage their staff to work harder. "Nobody is interested in working themselves to death for scraps," one person said. "I don't want to work very hard for CEOs to make millions while I'm barley able to afford bread," another said. "Our generation is just sick of working hard to have all the higher ups take the credit and the bag. We know what we're worth," a third added. A recent Productivity Commission report found that Aussies born after 1990 are finding more difficult than previous generations to move up the financial ladder. The report also found that young Aussies are increasingly earning less than their parents did at the same age, with the global financial crisis partially to blame for the weak income growth. Images: The Project

Money & Banking

So when should you book that flight? The truth on airline prices

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yuriy-gorodnichenko-144556">Yuriy Gorodnichenko</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-california-berkeley-754">University of California, Berkeley</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/volodymyr-bilotkach-145437">Volodymyr Bilotkach</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/newcastle-university-906">Newcastle University</a> How airlines price tickets is a source of many <a href="http://airtravel.about.com/od/travelindustrynews/a/mythticket.htm">myths</a> and urban legends. These include tips about the best day of the week to buy a ticket, last-minute discounts offered by the airlines, and the conspiracy theories suggesting that the carriers use cookies to increase prices for their passengers. None of these three statements is entirely true. Studies have suggested that prices can be higher or lower on a given day of the week – yet, there is no clear consensus on which day that is. Offered prices can in fact drop at any time before the flight, yet they are much more likely to increase than decrease over the last several weeks before the flight’s departure. Further, the airlines prefer to wait for the last-minute business traveler who’s likely to pay full fare rather than sell the seat prematurely to a price conscious traveler. And no, the airlines do not use cookies to manipulate fare quotes – adjusting their inventory for specific customers appears to be beyond their technical capabilities. What is true about pricing in the airline industry is that carriers use complex and sophisticated pricing systems. The airline’s per passenger cost is the lowest when the flight is full, so carriers have incentive to sell as many seats as possible. This is a race against time for an airline and, of course, no company wants to discount its product more than it has to. Hence, the airlines face two somewhat contradictory goals: to maximize revenue by flying full planes and to sell as many full-fare seats as possible. This a process known in the industry as yield or revenue management. <h2>Airlines and their bucket lists</h2> Here is how <a href="http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1522&context=jaaer">yield management</a> works. For each flight or route (if we are talking about multi-segment itineraries), the airline has a set of available price levels – from the most expensive fully refundable fare to the cheapest deeply discounted non-refundable price. The industry jargon for these prices is “buckets.” Then, seats can be interpreted as balls that are allocated among these buckets. Initial allocation of seats between the price buckets is determined by historical data indicating how well a certain flight sells. For example, fewer deeply discounted seats will be offered on a flight on Thanksgiving week than on the same flight during the third week of February. As the seats on a flight sell, yield managers monitor and adjust the seat allocation. If, for instance, the sales are slower than expected, some of the seats might be moved to lower-priced buckets – this shows up as a price drop. As noted above, such price drops can occur at any time before the flight. However, the general trend of price quotes is upward starting from about two to three weeks before the flight departure date. Of course, an average traveler wants to know when he or she should buy the tickets for the next trip. Another important question is where to buy this ticket. Airlines distribute their inventory on their own websites and on several computer distribution systems, meaning that prices can sometimes differ depending on where one looks. We are not entirely sure what precipitates this phenomenon – likely explanations include differences in contracts between the airlines and the distribution systems/travel agents, implying that different travel agents may not have access to the airline’s entire inventory of available prices. <h2>When to book</h2> The airlines’ yield managers start looking at flight bookings about two months before the departure date. This implies that it generally does not pay to book more than two months in advance: studies show that initially the airlines leave the cheapest price buckets empty, and yield managers may move some seats into those buckets if a couple of months before the departure date the flight is emptier than expected. Between two months and about two to three weeks before the flight date, the fare quotes remain mostly flat, with a slight upward trend. However, and perhaps paradoxically, there is a good chance of a price drop during this period. We tend to monitor prices for several days – sometimes up to a week – hoping for a potentially lower quote. It does not always pay off, but sometimes we do manage to save a considerable amount of money. Two to three weeks before the flight date, the price quotes start increasing. This is the time when business travelers start booking. While price drops are still possible, a chance of a price increase is much higher if you wait to book within this time period. This is also the time when one can find significant differences between price quotes, depending on where one looks and what contract they have with the airlines. Thus, if we book a trip earlier than three weeks before the flight date, we tend not to delay the purchase. At the same time, we check quotes from multiple travel agents, or go directly to a site that allows for a quick comparison of prices (such as <a href="https://www.kayak.com">kayak.com</a> or <a href="http://www.skyscanner.net">skyscanner.net</a>). Or check the airline itself. As for answering the original question we posed, here are some simple tips. First, if you have to travel during a peak period, such as Thanksgiving week, it is generally best not to delay buying that ticket. Otherwise, it might pay to monitor the offered prices for some time before committing. The best strategy for booking within the last couple of weeks before the flight, however, is not to delay the purchase, but to try getting quotes from several agents, which is easy to do in the internet age.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/34033/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yuriy-gorodnichenko-144556">Yuriy Gorodnichenko</a>, Associate Professor of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-california-berkeley-754">University of California, Berkeley</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/volodymyr-bilotkach-145437">Volodymyr Bilotkach</a>, Senior Lecturer in Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/newcastle-university-906">Newcastle University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/so-when-should-you-book-that-flight-the-truth-on-airline-prices-34033">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Tips

Aussies working in "priority occupations" eligible for cash increase

Thousands of hard-working Aussies who work in certain areas are now eligible for new training and support payments of up to $10,000. The initiative comes to support Australians working in sectors with a high demand for skilled workers, and a commitment to clean energy. From July 1st, thousands of apprentices working in what the government deems as “priority occupations” are eligible for the $5,000 Australian Apprenticeship Training Support Payment. If those priority occupations also offer exposure and experience in “clean energy”, apprentices are instead eligible for the more lucrative New Energy Apprenticeship Support Payment of up to $10,000. The list of "priority occupations" is extensive and includes aged care workers, arborists, bakers, beauty therapists and many more. According to the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR), the jobs are characterised by a strong current demand for skilled workers, and a strong demand expected in the future. The clean energy jobs also include many different professions, with agricultural and agritech technicians, automotive electricians, regular electricians, gas fitters, glaziers, joiners, plumbers and welders all included. The full list of priority jobs can be found on the <a href="https://www.dewr.gov.au/skills-support-individuals/resources/appendix-australian-apprenticeship-priority-list-1-january-2024" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-link-type="article-inline">Department of Employment and Workplace Relations website.</a> For the Australian Apprenticeship Training Support Payment, the $5000 payment comes in four instalments over two years, while the New Energy Apprentice Support Payment is paid out over the course of the apprenticeship — up to $5000 for part-time apprentices and up to $10,000 for full-time apprentices. It is hoped the payments will incentivise apprentices to remain on the career pathway. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Cheaper mortgages, tamed inflation and even higher home prices: how 29 forecasters see Australia’s economic recovery in 2024-25

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Australia’s top economic forecasters expect the Reserve Bank to start cutting interest rates by March next year, taking 0.35 points of its cash rate by June. If passed on in full, the cut would take $125 off the monthly cost of servicing a $600,000 variable-rate mortgage, with more to come. The panel of 29 forecasters assembled by The Conversation expects a further cut of 0.3 points by the end of 2025. This would take the cash rate down from the current 4.35% to 3.75% and produce a total cut in monthly payments on a $600,000 mortgage of $335. The forecasts were produced after last week’s news of a higher than expected <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-inflation-rate-jumps-to-4-putting-an-rba-rate-rise-back-on-the-agenda-233331">monthly consumers price index</a>. Several of those surveyed revised up their predictions for interest rates in the year ahead, while continuing to predict cuts by mid next year. Only two expect higher rates by mid next year. Only four expect no change. <hr /> <iframe id="6eIe8" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/6eIe8/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Now in its sixth year, The Conversation survey draws on the expertise of leading forecasters in 22 Australian universities, think tanks and financial institutions – among them economic modellers, former Treasury and Reserve Bank officials and a former member of the Reserve Bank board. Eight of the 29 expect the first cut to come this year, by either November or December. One of them is Luci Ellis, who was until recently assistant governor (economic) at the Reserve Bank and is now at Westpac. She and her team are forecasting three interest rate cuts by the middle of next year, taking the cash rate from 4.35% to 3.6%. <h2>Reserve Bank a ‘reluctant hiker’</h2> Ellis says inflation isn’t falling fast enough for the bank to be confident of being able to cut before November. But after that, even if inflation isn’t completely back within the bank’s target band but is merely moving towards it, a “forward-looking” board would want to start easing interest rates. Another forecaster, Su-Lin Ong of RBC Capital Markets, says in her view the bank should hike at its next board meeting in August after the release of figures likely to show inflation is still too high. But she says the bank is a “reluctant hiker” and keen to keep unemployment low. Although several panellists expect the Reserve Bank to hike rates in the months ahead, almost all expect rates to be lower in a year’s time than they are today. <hr /> <iframe id="2xF3M" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/2xF3M/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The panel expects inflation to be back within the Reserve Bank’s 2-3% target band by June next year, and to be close to it (3.3%) by the end of this year. Twelve of the panel expect inflation to climb further when the official figures are released at the end of this month, but none expect it to climb further beyond that. And all expect inflation to be lower by the end of the financial year than it is today. One, Percy Allan, a former head of the NSW Treasury, cautions that the tax cuts and other government support measures due to start this month run the risk of boosting spending and falling progress on inflation. <hr /> <iframe id="LGJa7" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/LGJa7/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The panel expects wages growth to fall from 4% to 3.5% over the year ahead, contributing to downward pressure on inflation, but to remain higher than prices growth, producing gains in so-called <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/realincome.asp">real wages</a>. It expects wages growth to moderate further, to 3.2%, in 2025-26. <hr /> <iframe id="iV7mZ" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/iV7mZ/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Consumer spending is expected to remain unusually weak, growing by only 1.7% in real terms over the next 12 months, up from 1.3% in the latest national accounts. Mala Raghavan, from the University of Tasmania, said even though inflation was falling, previous price rises meant the prices of essentials remained high. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver expected the boost from the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/tax-cuts">Stage 3 tax cuts</a> to be offset by the depressing effect of a weaker labour market. <h2>Unemployment to climb modestly</h2> The panel expects Australia’s unemployment rate to climb steadily from its present historically low 4% to 4.4%. Moodys Analytics economist Harry Murphy Cruise said although the increase wasn’t big, the effect on pay packets would be bigger. Employers were shaving hours and easing back on hiring rather than letting go of workers. <hr /> <iframe id="SM8PI" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/SM8PI/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Panellists expect China’s economic growth to slip from 5.3% to 5% and US growth to slip from 2.9% to 2.4%. Australia’s economic growth is expected to climb from the present very low 1.1% to 1.3% by the end of this year and to 2% by the end of next year. Although none of the panel are forecasting a recession, most of those who offered an opinion said if there was a recession, it would start this year when the economy was weak. Some said we might later discover that we have been in a recession if the very weak economic growth of 0.1% recorded in the March quarter is revised and turns negative when updated figures are released in September. <hr /> <iframe id="3I49o" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/3I49o/1/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Home prices are expected to continue to climb notwithstanding economic weakness. Sydney prices are expected to increase a further 5% in the year ahead after climbing 7.4% in the year to May. Melbourne prices are expected to rise a further 2.8% after climbing 1.8% in the year to May. Percy Allan said Sydney had fewer homes available than Melbourne, and Victoria’s decisions to extend land tax and boost rights for tenants had upset landlords, many of whom were offloading their holdings. <h2>Home prices to climb further</h2> Julie Toth, chief economist at property information firm PEXA, said rapid population growth was colliding with an ongoing decline in household size since COVID. At the same time, fewer new homes were being commissioned and long delays and high construction costs were also keeping supply tight. <hr /> <iframe id="JzLaY" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/JzLaY/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The panel expects non-mining business investment to continue to climb in the year ahead, by 5.2%, down from 6.9%. It expects the Australian share market to climb by a further 5.6% Read the answers on <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/3350/2024-25_The_Conversation_AU_Forecasting_Survey.pdf">PDF</a>, download as <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/3351/2024-25_The_Conversation_AU_forecasting_survey.xlsx?1719478737">XLS</a> <hr /> <h2>The Conversation’s Economic Panel</h2> Click on economist to see full profile. <iframe id="tc-infographic-1066" class="tc-infographic" style="border: none;" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/1066/93fb29ba32e178ec2dcda111f014a50cf7ea1f49/site/index.html" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/233244/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/cheaper-mortgages-tamed-inflation-and-even-higher-home-prices-how-29-forecasters-see-australias-economic-recovery-in-2024-25-233244">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

How would a switch to nuclear affect electricity prices for households and industry?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/roger-dargaville-1832">Roger Dargaville</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> Peter Dutton has announced that under a Coalition government, seven nuclear power stations would be built around the country over the next 15 years. Experts have declared nuclear power would be <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-20/power-prices-wont-fall-with-nuclear/103998172">expensive</a> and <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/nuclear-to-cost-17b-and-take-until-2040-to-build-csiro-20240521-p5jfaj#:%7E:text=Nuclear%20could%20cost%20up%20to,until%202040%20to%20build%3A%20CSIRO&text=Peter%20Dutton's%20nuclear%20energy%20plans,operational%20until%20at%20least%202040.">slow to build</a>. But what might happen to energy prices if the Coalition were to win government and implement this plan? <h2>How might we estimate the cost of nuclear?</h2> By 2035, 50–60% of the existing coal-fired fleet will very likely <a href="https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/stakeholder_consultation/consultations/nem-consultations/2023/draft-2024-isp-consultation/draft-2024-isp.pdf">have been retired</a>, including Vales Point B, Gladstone, Yallourn, Bayswater and Eraring – all of which will have passed 50 years old. These five generators contribute just over 10 gigawatts of capacity. It’s probably not a coincidence that the seven nuclear plants proposed by Dutton would also contribute roughly 10 gigawatts in total if built. Neither my team at Monash University nor the Australian Energy Market Operator has run modelling scenarios to delve into the details of what might happen to electricity prices under a high-uptake nuclear scenario such as the one proposed by the Coalition. That said, we can make some broad assumptions based on a metric known as the “levelised cost of electricity”. This value takes into account: <ul> <li> how much it costs to build a particular technology </li> <li> how long it takes to build </li> <li> the cost to operate the plant </li> <li> its lifetime </li> <li> and very importantly, its capacity factor. </li> </ul> Capacity factor is how much electricity a technology produces in real life, compared with its theoretical maximum output. For example, a nuclear power station would likely run at 90–95% of its full capacity. A solar farm, on the other hand, will run at just 20–25% of its maximum, primarily because it’s night for half of the time, and cloudy some of the time. CSIRO recently published its <a href="https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/gencost">GenCost</a> report, which outlines the current and projected build and operational costs for a range of energy technologies. It reports that large-scale nuclear generated electricity would cost between A$155 and $252 per megawatt-hour, falling to between $136 and $226 per megawatt-hour by 2040. The report bases these costs on recent projects in South Korea, but doesn’t consider some other cases where costs have blown out dramatically. The most obvious case is that of <a href="https://www.edf.fr/en/the-edf-group/dedicated-sections/journalists/all-press-releases/hinkley-point-c-update-1">Hinkley Point C nuclear plant</a> in the United Kingdom. This <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/edfs-nuclear-project-britain-pushed-back-2029-may-cost-up-34-bln-2024-01-23/">3.2GW</a> plant, which is being built by French company EDF, was recently <a href="https://www.edf.fr/en/the-edf-group/dedicated-sections/journalists/all-press-releases/hinkley-point-c-update-1">reported</a> to be now costing around £34 billion (about A$65 billion). That’s about A$20,000 per kilowatt. CSIRO’s GenCost report assumed a value of $8,655 per kilowatt for nuclear, so the true levelised cost of electricity of nuclear power in Australia may end up being twice as expensive as CSIRO has calculated. <hr /> <iframe id="Aryx7" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Aryx7/4/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> <h2>Other factors play a role, too</h2> Another factor not accounted for in the GenCost assumptions is that Australia does not have a nuclear industry. Virtually all the niche expertise would need to be imported. And very large infrastructure projects have a nasty habit of <a href="https://www.cis.org.au/publication/bungles-blowouts-and-boondoggles-why-australias-infrastructure-projects-cost-more-than-they-should/">blowing out in cost</a> – think of Snowy 2.0, Sydney’s light rail project, and the West Gate Tunnel in Victoria. Reasons include higher local wages, regulations and standards plus aversion from lenders to risk that increases cost of capital. These factors would not bode well for nuclear. In CSIRO’s GenCost report, the levelised cost of electricity produced from coal is $100–200 per megawatt-hour, and for gas it’s $120–160 per megawatt-hour. Solar and wind energy work out to be approximately $60 and $90 per megawatt-hour, respectively. But it’s not a fair comparison, as wind and solar are not “dispatchable” but are dependent on the availability of the resource. When you combine the cost of a mix of wind and solar energy and storage, along with the cost of getting the renewable energy into the grid, renewables end up costing $100–120 per megawatt-hour, similar to coal. If we were to have a nuclear-based system (supplemented by gas to meet the higher demands in the mornings and evenings), the costs would likely be much higher – potentially as much as three to four times if cost blowouts similar to Hinkley Point C were to occur (assuming costs were passed on to electricity consumers. Otherwise, taxpayers in general would bear the burden. Either way, it’s more or less the same people). <h2>But what about the impact on your household energy bill?</h2> Well, here the news is marginally better. Typical retail tariffs are 25-30 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is $250–300 per megawatt-hour. The largest component of your energy bill is not the cost of generation of the electricity; rather, it’s the cost of getting the power from the power stations to your home or business. In very approximate terms, this is made up of the market average costs of generation, transmission and distribution, as well as retailer margin and other minor costs. The transmission and distribution costs will not be significantly different under the nuclear scenario compared with the current system. And the additional transmission costs associated with the more distributed nature of renewables (meaning these renewable projects are all over the country) is included in the estimate. According to my back-of-the-envelope calculations, your retail tariff under the nuclear scenario could be 40–50c per kilowatt-hour. But if you are a large energy consumer such as an aluminium smelter, you pay considerably less per kilowatt-hour as you don’t incur the same network or retailer costs (but the cost of generating electricity in the first place makes up a much bigger proportion of the total cost). So if the cost of electricity generation soars, this hypothetical aluminium smelter’s energy costs will soar too. This would be a severe cost burden on Australian industry that has traditionally relied on cheap electricity (although it’s been a while since electricity could be described as cheap). <h2>A likely increase in energy costs</h2> In summary, in a free market, it is very unlikely nuclear could be competitive. But if a future Coalition government were to bring nuclear into the mix, energy costs for residential and especially industrial customers would very likely increase.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/232913/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/roger-dargaville-1832">Roger Dargaville</a>, Director Monash Energy Institute, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-would-a-switch-to-nuclear-affect-electricity-prices-for-households-and-industry-232913">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Steve Price fires up over Dan Andrews' special honour

Steve Price has sparked a bitter row on-air with his co-hosts of The Project, as he spoke out against former premier Dan Andrews being named on the King’s Honours list this year. Andrews, the former premier of Victoria who saw the state through the Covid pandemic, has been recognised on the prestigious list for his “eminent service to the people and parliament of Victoria, to public health, to policy and regulatory reform, and to infrastructure development”. After the announcement of Andrews' upcoming recognition, Price let loose on The Project as he condemned the former premier. “It’s got to be some sort of sick joke,” he said as he began his rant. “Who would expect Daniel Andrews would get the highest honour that you can possibly get from the King? It’s the equivalent of a Knighthood! This is a bloke who locked Victoria up longer than anywhere else in the word. Apart from Covid, this bloke wasted 600 million dollars not holding the Commonwealth Games.” <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C8B5Ft8Pe0k/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C8B5Ft8Pe0k/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by The Project (@theprojecttv)</a> </div> </blockquote> He continued, “Every infrastructure project he’s [Andrews] ticked off on is either over budget or over time. And we give him an award? I mean it is pathetic!” “I have never heard people today so angry about something like this. Daniel Andrews should be run out of the State, not given an award. It’s pathetic!” As co-host Waleed Aly began to share his own thoughts on the matter, Price butted in to ask, “You’re not going to defend Andrews are you?” “Will you let me say something?” replied Aly awkwardly, as Price nodded his head. “Premiers usually get these awards, but they don’t usually get them this quickly,” continued Aly. “And the weird thing about this is that it isn’t for services to the State, it’s for services to health. And that makes it about the pandemic disproportionately. If this was happening in a few years, I don’t think we’d be having this conversation.” Despite Price's claims that many were angry with the decision to award Andrews with the honour, it turns out most of the outrage was directed towards Price himself as many condemned his "embarrassing" rant. “What criteria is The Project applying to Steve Prices opinion? The short man is a self serving blowhard that has no credible platform for his opinions. Surely in 2024 there are better options in Australia,” ranted one annoyed viewer. A second person commented, “If it makes Steve Price mad then it’s a great decision!!” with another replying, “Like anybody should give credibility to anything Steve Price says”. The onslaught of remarks didn’t end there, with another firing back, “Steve Price is jealous and miserable,” while a similarly annoyed viewer wrote, “Dan living rent free in Price’s head, embarrassing”. Image credits: The Project / AMES ROSS/EPA-EFE / Shutterstock Editorial

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Readers response: What seems too expensive but is really worth the price?

To move or not to move: is it cheaper to find a new place or stay when your rent increases by 10%?

"Misconceived": Coles and Woolies fight allegations of price gouging

Coles and Woolies shoppers could claim thousands over alleged deceptive pricing

"Can you sleep at night?" Frustrated shopper confronts Woolies CEO over price gouging

How to revive your curls without paying salon prices

Aussies outraged over price of staple snack

Old grocery receipt highlights extortionate increase at supermarkets

Does intermittent fasting increase or decrease our risk of cancer?

Constipation increases your risk of a heart attack, new study finds – and not just on the toilet

Does eating ham, bacon and beef really increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes?

How long does back pain last? And how can learning about pain increase the chance of recovery?

Readers response: What are your thoughts on the increasing use of digital payments?

What is competition, and why is it so important for prices?

Young Aussies hit back at Steve Price for calling them "lazy"

So when should you book that flight? The truth on airline prices

Aussies working in "priority occupations" eligible for cash increase

Cheaper mortgages, tamed inflation and even higher home prices: how 29 forecasters see Australia’s economic recovery in 2024-25

How would a switch to nuclear affect electricity prices for households and industry?

Steve Price fires up over Dan Andrews' special honour

Our Partners