Heatwaves will lead to much higher death rates across the country. The number of people in Sydney killed by the heat could climb by 444 per cent to 520 a year if global temperatures climb by 3 degrees. In Melbourne, annual heat-related deaths could increase 250 per cent to around 350.
Coastal cities and towns will be forced to deal with higher sea levels even if global temperatures stopped rising.
The assessment found 1.5 million people living in coastal communities at risk from sea inundation or erosion by 2050, rising to more than 3 million by 2090.
Sydney currently experiences 31 days a year of coastal flooding. At 1.5 degrees of warming, that would increase to 85 days; at 3 degrees, more than 300 days.
For Melbourne, coastal flooding risks would rise from 10 days a year to 40 days at 1.5 degrees of warming and 300 days a year at 3 degrees.
Increased natural disasters could cost the country up to $200.6 billion a year. NSW alone could face an annual $50 billion bill to deal with increased flooding, fires and storm damage, while Victoria could face a $33 billion annual hit.
Climate change of either 2 or 3 degrees will ravage ecosystems, from coral reefs to eucalypt forests and Alpine regions. Degradation of the natural environment will undermine its role as a carbon sink, the report warns, creating positive feedback loops that worsen climate change. Restoring nature can reduce the climate impacts.
Higher temperatures will be a particular risk to the nation’s cattle herd and sheep flock, with production expected to fall as animals struggle to deal with long periods of heat stress.
It won’t just be the nation’s sheep and cattle suffering. The assessment noted that horticultural products will be at risk from “fruit sunburn”. Yields of perennial fruits and nuts, including walnuts, apples, mangos and avocado, are likely to drop.
The report’s findings prompted calls for the government to lift its ambitions for the nation’s 2035 emissions target which is expected to be confirmed later this week.
The Coalition currently supports net zero by 2050 but is in the midst of reviewing all of its election policies.
Nationals senator Matt Canavan, said he anticipated the Coalition would walk away from the net zero target calling the policy a “crazy, big government agenda”.
A vocal opponent of the policy, Canavan is chairing the Coalition’s internal review into net zero, and said it was out-of-touch with the desires of party members. This past weekend Victorian Liberal members voted to abandon net zero following in the footsteps of the Queensland LNP, WA Liberals and the NSW Nationals.
“How are we going to win elections if the parliamentary party has a policy so diametrically opposed to the core membership of the party? I mean, those things don’t compute,” Canavan told Sky News.
Opposition leader Sussan Ley, with shadow treasurer Ted O’Brien, said climate change was a global problem that needed a global response.
“Australia cannot make a difference on its own, but we must play our part. The Coalition will always support sensible action to reduce emissions, strengthen resilience, and protect communities,” she said.
Greens leader Larissa Waters said the government had to bring forward net zero emissions target from 2050 to 2035, arguing the coal and gas industries were now a dead weight on Australia’s climate target.
“If Labor fails to set a science-based climate target, then it’s crystal clear: they have utterly prioritised coal and gas profits at the expense of community safety and nature,” she said.
Loading
Amanda McKenzie, chief executive of Climate Council which believes the government should aim for net zero by 2025, said the assessment’s findings highlighted the growing tension “between what is necessary and what is possible”
Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox, who said the report should be updated every five years, said the assessment highlighted the dangers of doing nothing to deal with climate change.
“With a new national emissions target in the offing, the risk data is a reminder that ‘least cost climate policy’ is not just about the efficiency of climate policy tools, but also their effectiveness in avoiding as much as possible in terms of the costs of climate change itself,” he said.
