Long-term climate analysis
We analyse historical records to identify trends in temperature, rainfall, wind and extreme events for your site and region.
Climate baselines, extreme event and trend analysis, and downscaled projection scenarios for planning, approvals, infrastructure design and operational risk across Australia.
Climatology describes the conditions and extremes your project will live with for decades, not the weather next week. Air Environment's air quality assessment consultants build climate baselines and risk assessments that support planning, design, approvals and operational decisions for sites across Australia.
Trusted by industry, government, developers and legal teams across Australia
We analyse historical records to identify trends in temperature, rainfall, wind and extreme events for your site and region.
We assess how climate variability and long-term change may affect operations, infrastructure and compliance risk.
We evaluate heatwaves, droughts, intense rainfall and other extremes to quantify operational vulnerability and return periods.
We translate complex climate datasets into clear insights that support planning, approvals and risk management.
We establish climate baselines for proposed developments to support environmental impact assessment and approvals.
We assess future scenarios using recognised downscaled projection datasets to inform long-term design and investment decisions.
We review how climate conditions influence emissions, dust generation and air quality outcomes across the year.
We deliver structured, defensible reporting suited to development applications, regulatory submissions and peer review.
Climate data is easy to download and easy to misread. Which dataset you start from changes the answer, so we name it every time.
| Dataset | Type | What it gives you |
|---|---|---|
| BoM station observations | Observations | Daily and monthly records from the Bureau's observing network. The starting point for any site baseline, once representativeness and completeness are checked. |
| ACORN-SAT | Homogenised observations | The Bureau's homogenised daily temperature record for 112 locations from 1910. Used for trend work, where site moves and instrument changes would otherwise manufacture a trend that is not real. |
| AGCD | Gridded analysis | Australian Gridded Climate Data, the Bureau's official gridded rainfall and temperature analysis on a 5km grid. It replaced AWAP in 2020. Gives spatial context where no station sits near the site. |
| SILO | Patched point data | Queensland Government patched point and gridded datasets from 1889. Continuous daily series with gaps already infilled, widely used for agriculture, water and operational modelling. |
| ERA5 | Reanalysis | ECMWF's global reanalysis, hourly from 1940. Supplies upper air, wind and humidity fields where surface records alone are not enough. |
| CMIP6 | Global projections | The global climate model ensemble underpinning the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. Sets the scenario framing before any downscaling. |
| NARCliM2.0 | Downscaled projections | Released in 2024 at 4km over south-eastern Australia and 20km across Australasia, downscaling five CMIP6 models under SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5 and SSP3-7.0. |
| QldFCP-2 | Downscaled projections | Queensland Future Climate Projections, around 60 downscaled CMIP6 simulations at 10km. The better fit for Queensland sites. |
Swipe the table sideways to see all columns.
Which dataset matters more than most people expect. A raw station record and a homogenised one can point in different directions over the same period, because a station move or an instrument change leaves a step in the data that looks exactly like a climate signal. We name the dataset, the period and the version in every report, so a reviewer can reproduce the number rather than take it on trust.
Anyone can pull a 30-year average off a website. The value is in knowing whether that average means anything for your site, and saying so when it does not.
We match record length, station selection and statistics to the decision, not to whichever dataset is closest to hand.
Gap filling, homogeneity checks and station comparisons happen before any conclusion is drawn.
Datasets, versions, periods and limitations are documented so a reviewer can reproduce the number.
Streamlined processing and scalable workflows meet approval and reporting deadlines without cutting corners.
We separate what the historical record shows from what a projection implies, and say how confident each is.
We explain what the trend means for design, scheduling and risk, not just the statistics behind it.
This is the question that sets your budget and your timeline. It is much cheaper to answer before a scope is written than after.
Analysis of what has actually been observed at or near the site, going back as far as the record allows.
Establishing a baseline for an approval, quantifying exposure that already exists, or answering a claim about current conditions.
Weeks. The data already exists, so effort goes into station selection, quality control and interpretation.
Station moves, instrument changes and gaps. An unhomogenised record can show a step change that looks like climate but is really a shift in how it was measured.
Downscaled model scenarios describing plausible future conditions under different emissions pathways.
Assets or approvals run for decades, or a regulator, lender or board has asked for forward-looking physical risk.
Longer. Scenario selection, ensemble handling and interpretation drive the effort, not the data pull.
Single-number answers. A projection is a range across scenarios and models. Presenting one figure as the future is where assessments get taken apart in review.
Most climate risk work needs both. The record sets the baseline and proves the method, projections extend it. We will also tell you when a projection adds nothing to the decision you are actually making.
Every climatology engagement lands as a defined set of deliverables, not a folder of downloaded CSVs.
Monthly and annual normals for temperature, rainfall, humidity and wind, with the reference period and station selection stated up front.
Frequency and return periods for heat, intense rainfall and drought, so design thresholds are set against evidence rather than memory.
Direction, magnitude and whether the trend is statistically significant, not a line drawn by eye through a noisy record.
Scenario ranges rather than single numbers, with the emissions pathways and downscaled datasets named.
Climograms, wind roses, trend plots and exceedance tables built to drop straight into a submission.
Plain-English interpretation of what the climate means for design, scheduling and risk, structured for approvals and peer review.
Climate baselines and statistics supporting planning applications, environmental impact statements and works approvals.
Design conditions, extremes and return periods for assets expected to operate for decades.
Exposure analysis supporting heat management plans, shift design and safe work procedures.
Wet and dry season statistics that inform scheduling, water management and contingency planning.
Analysis identifying the seasons and conditions when impacts are most likely, with input from our air pollution consultant team.
Site-level physical climate risk inputs for board reporting, due diligence and climate-related financial disclosure.
Growing season, evaporation and rainfall reliability statistics for operations that live and die by the weather.
Independent climate analysis and expert testimony for court, tribunal and mediation.
We clarify what must be proven and what the project needs to achieve.
Monitoring, sampling and modelling designed to be credible and efficient.
We interpret results, test assumptions and quantify uncertainty where needed.
Regulator-ready reporting, stakeholder clarity, and support through next steps.
Andrew and the team proved to be very flexible and responsive in accommodating changes and providing strategic and technical advice. I would highly recommend Air Environment and will certainly use them again.
I would recommend Air Environment for any matter involving the detailed analysis and interpretation of meteorological data and the development of atmospheric meteorological models.
Andrew’s reporting and evidence provided to the court was thorough, clear, compelling and to the point and resulted in the client achieving a successful outcome.
A short overview of our services, the models we run, our laboratory capability and the project experience behind them. Useful if you are building a shortlist or need something to circulate internally.
Climate analysis is usually one input into a bigger question. Our air quality monitoring consultants and modellers can pick up the rest of the scope from here.
Common questions about climate baselines, datasets, projections, extreme event analysis, and how climatology supports approvals and risk management.
Meteorology deals with the hour-to-hour conditions that drive a specific dispersion result. Climatology describes the typical conditions and the extremes across decades. Approvals usually need both: meteorology for the modelling, climatology for the baseline and the risk narrative around it.
Long enough for the statistic to mean something. Thirty years is the conventional reference period for describing normals, and it is what most guidelines expect. Useful work can be done on shorter records where a station is newer, provided the limitation is stated rather than buried. We select stations on data completeness and representativeness, not on distance alone.
Bureau of Meteorology station observations and ACORN-SAT for homogenised temperature, AGCD for gridded rainfall and temperature, SILO for patched daily series, and ERA5 reanalysis where upper air or wind fields are needed. For projections we work with CMIP6 and the downscaled products that suit the location, including NARCliM2.0 for south-eastern Australia and QldFCP-2 for Queensland. Every report names the dataset, version and period used.
Yes, where the decision has a long enough horizon to justify it. We present results as scenario ranges across multiple models rather than a single number, name the emissions pathways used, and keep a clear line between what the historical record shows and what a projection implies. A projection reported as one figure is a projection that will not survive review.
Yes, and it is cheaper to do once, early. Bringing in an air impact assessment consultant at the baseline stage means the climate and meteorological scopes can be set together, rather than repeated when a reviewer asks for more.
Strongly, and often more than operators expect. Temperature inversions, calm periods, seasonal wind patterns and dry spells all shift when impacts are most likely to occur and be noticed. Our air pollution consultant and odour consultant teams use climate analysis to identify the conditions that create the highest-risk windows at a site, which is what makes a management plan practical rather than generic.
We provide the physical climate risk inputs: exposure to heat, rainfall, drought, wind and extreme events at specific sites, with datasets and scenarios documented. We are not accountants and we do not prepare the disclosure itself, but we supply the site-level evidence that sits underneath it.
Defensible work is transparent and review-ready. We document data sources, periods, gap-filling and quality checks, use fit-for-purpose methods, and present conclusions clearly so regulators and stakeholders can follow how we got there.
Yes. We deliver air consulting services across Australia, including regional and remote sites, and have supported international projects for clients across Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, and North and South America.
Yes, where appropriate. We provide independent technical review and clear written opinions for high-scrutiny contexts. All of our senior consultants have experience giving expert testimony in court, tribunal and mediation settings.