How the National Climate Risk Assessment Shapes Our Fight for Health: Insights and Actions You Can Take

Australia is at a climate crossroads, and the recent National Climate Risk Assessment makes this clear. This report highlights serious risks to our health, environment, and economy from climate change. It identifies 63 key risks, including increased deaths from heat, loss of infrastructure, and the spread of infectious diseases. We are clearly facing a crisis.

Despite these warnings, on September 12, the federal government approved the North West Shelf Extension, allowing Australia’s major fossil fuel company, Woodside, to process offshore gas until 2070. The economic gains are minimal, and many Australians could suffer health impacts. This decision raises questions about our government’s commitment to combating climate change.

As a signatory of the Paris Agreement, Australia must set new emissions reduction targets every five years. The latest target, announced on September 18, aims for a 62-70% reduction by 2035, based on 2005 levels. Many experts, including those from the IPCC, believe this target falls short of what is necessary to tackle serious climate threats.

Interestingly, while the government highlights climate dangers, it continues to approve fossil fuel projects that increase emissions. In fact, Australia is responsible for about 4.5% of global fossil fuel carbon dioxide emissions—mostly from exports. This situation is similar to a doctor treating a patient for respiratory issues while encouraging smoking. Such hypocrisy contradicts the principles of good healthcare.

A 2024 report by Doctors for the Environment Australia underscored the health dangers posed by fossil fuels, likening them to smoking. The ongoing reliance on coal and gas harms public health through air pollution and climate change, which affects overall wellbeing. As health professionals, we are ethically bound to address these threats, similar to how we tackled risks from tobacco and asbestos.

Recently, the DEA sought a judicial review against the approval of Woodside’s Scarborough gas project, which is expected to add massive CO2 emissions. Unfortunately, the courts upheld the government’s decision, despite acknowledging the climate threat. Justice McElwaine stated, “It is not for this Court to adjudicate on the existential threat posed by climate change.” This raises a critical question: If not the courts, then who is responsible for addressing such risks?

The United Nations International Court of Justice has made it clear: all nations must take steps to protect people and limit global warming. Yet, Australia’s current targets fall short, warning that we may not be prioritizing health adequately. The DEA has stated that the 62-70% target is insufficient to shield public health and the environment.

Australia is one of the world’s largest exporters of fossil fuels, with the Newcastle coal port being the largest globally. Given the scale of Australia’s contribution to climate change, there is an urgent need for us to step up and demand better from our leaders. As health professionals, we hold a trusted position in the community and must advocate for change.

The risks from climate change are serious, affecting our children and future generations. With recent science solidly backing the dangers, we cannot afford to sit idle. The government needs to prioritize effective regulations against fossil fuels and commit to meaningful emissions reductions.

Personally, I recognize my responsibility to act. I drive an electric vehicle and encourage others to consider cleaner options. As chair of the DEA, I will continue to advocate for health-centered responses to climate change. The time for action is now.

At its core, the climate crisis is a health crisis. Governments must prioritize our health, as backed by the UN. Just as we led the charge against tobacco, we can drive change away from fossil fuels.

Source link