As the earth continues its inexorable rise in temperate, we watch transfixed, unable to plan how we are going to cope. We kid ourselves that if we make the right efforts, we will limit that rise to 1.5 degrees. The truth is that no matter what we do in Australia, we will see two degrees before 2050 and possibly around 2040. People born this century may well see three degrees.
Spinifex is an opinion column open to all our readers. We require 700+ words on issues related to sustainability especially in the built environment and in business. Contact us to submit your column or for a more detailed brief.
In 2019, at the World Engineering Conference in Melbourne, a workshop of 120 engineers unanimously decided that a Plan B is required. That is, they decided that we need a plan on how to cope if we fail to stop the rising temperatures. Since that time, the imbalance of heat coming in versus heat going out of the earth has risen to a net 1.33 watts per square metre. That is the equivalent of almost a million Hiroshima sized nuclear bombs being detonated every day.
For a nation carrying just 0.3 per cent of the world’s population, when you count our exports, we contribute to more than ten times that in global emissions. Talk about punching above our weight. Of course, we have a moral obligation to be good world citizens, something that we have struggled with, but what difference will it actually make? We are in the hands of China, which accounts for more than half of world emissions, albeit they are making stuff to fill our shops.
We watched as transmission towers blew down in Adelaide. Then we watched as they blew down in Victoria. Where is the discussion on how we prevent this? Can we put them underground and, at the same time, reduce fire risks?
Think about places like Western Sydney if there is a run of days over forty degrees. The dark roofs of the houses nearly touch; there are very few trees and not much grass; the roads, footpaths and driveways are great heat absorbers. If the power goes out, the temperature inside houses will quickly rise to unliveable levels. This will happen unless the electricity system is upgraded or everyone gets batteries with their solar and goes off the grid. Where is the plan to ensure that the electricity distribution system remains operational?
When it comes to rainfall, we have the draft of the new Australian Rainfall and Runoff as an example. For every degree of warming the rainfall intensity curves are to be lifted 15 per cent for durations under one hour and 8 per cent for durations over one day. For three degrees, that means 52 per cent and 26 per cent, respectively. However, between 1997 and 2018 rainfall intensity in the greater Sydney region increased 40 per cent with 0.45 degrees of global warming. The upgrade to our dams and stormwater systems so that they can cope with the new paradigm will cost billions, if not trillions, of dollars.
Almost all of the actions required involve engineering in some form. Historically though, engineers have done as they are told. It is mostly the politicians who decide. The engineers simply have the expertise to make things happen. Engineers can do almost anything, given the funds. However, there is a moral question. Just because they can, should they?
On the flip side, should they sit back and just watch, waiting for the word to upgrade infrastructure where possible or retreat when countering nature is not possible? Engineers have the tools and the knowledge. They should use this to advise governments. They should do this without fear or favour. Their own code of ethics puts the safety of the community foremost in their obligations.
We can continue to sleepwalk into disaster, or we can opt to plan for what might be. Of course, we need a plan but don’t hold your breath.
