
How Long Will Australia Be Livable? - pseudolus
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/01/only-way-confront-australias-wildfires/604546/
======
pjc50
If "we" can live on Mars, we can live in Australia despite inhospitable
temperatures and an unbreathable atmosphere.

Conversely, if we _can 't_ live in Australia, with at least some naturally
occurring water, then we need to give up on the pipedreams of fleeing to a new
unspoiled planet and start to seriously address what's actually happening
here.

> like the ANZACs at Gallipoli, we have to rethink our strategy

Alternatively, like most military disasters, the arrogant leaders that were
thousands of miles from the frontline will learn nothing and continue to make
decisions that get people killed. While using nationalism to bolster their
support.

~~~
unforeseen9991
The costs of housing 100 people on mars, and the costs of housing 28 million
in a similar fashion here on earth, are slightly higher.

------
ehnto
It's hard for me to put this in a way that doesn't make me sound like a
climate change denier, but the climate related events in Australia, not just
the fires, are a combination of poor policy and climate change. The drought
conditions and unprecedented heat notwithstanding, we have also pretty poorly
managed the forests and water stocks, at times for the benefit of
corporations. This year could have gone a lot better than it did is all I'm
getting at.

To address the article: The will for any community to remain in place will be
stronger than we anticipate I think, as this is a long term issue it's hard to
imagine people thinking far enough ahead to start dismantling communities now.
The impetus needed to overcome the inertia of moving a community is enormous,
and as harsh as this year has been it is still the same flavour of challenges
we currently deal with so it's easy to feel complacent. Once these fires go
out, watch as Australia marches through the year like nothing happened and
headlong into next summer. We might be lucky and some smart cookies will pass
some more funding to the fire services so we can protect our communities.
Repeat until unrepeatable.

In the short term I think we'll see changing management of forests and
communities surrounded by them. We need to think hard about communities and
homes living at the interface between bush and mankind. We need to get better
at separating community from bushland, so we can let these fires burn and keep
the fuel in the forests at non-catastrophic levels and the vegetation and
fauna healthy.

------
kalium_xyz
The VOC declared it unlivable right after its discovery and the Dutch never
tried to settle there. Much later the English decided that they would love to
settle there, suppose you can settle anywhere if you want to settle
everywhere.

------
simonblack
That depends on an accurate figure for Australia's carrying-capacity.

The Aborigines have lived here for 60-odd thousand years without too much
trouble by the look of it. While European settlement is hitting hard limits
after a mere 250 years.

~~~
senectus1
yeah with a primitive life style, shorter lifespans and a very very low
population density.

Also GDP of 0

Dont try and compare.. its like comparing a apple and a 4 bedroom apartment.

------
potiuper
And will the next absurd question be how long will the Sahara be livable?

~~~
sliken
Agreed. After all the interior is basically empty, the average altitude 338
meters. Sure people will move a bit inland, not really a big deal.

~~~
fmajid
Water supply is the issue. The Aborigines' distant ancestors had the world's
most advanced seafaring technology 40,000 years ago, but the environment was
so harsh and hostile they just barely clung on, and regressed technologically.
At a minimum the Australians need to build solar-powered water desalination
plants on a massive scale, and water works to collect flood waters.

~~~
donavanm
Desal may be too little too late. Here in Sydney the desal plant is operating
at full capacity and supplying 15% (250Ml/day) of needs. There is talk of
expanding it to 30%, but how many years off will it be when the surface water
supply is already down to 40% storage capacity? Oh and of course the desal
plant doesn’t actually serve the entire city, mush less the metro.

[http://www.sydneywater.com.au/SW/water-the-
environment/how-w...](http://www.sydneywater.com.au/SW/water-the-
environment/how-we-manage-sydney-s-water/water-network/desalination/index.htm)

------
tgafpg
Good heavens. Next year, these same clueless wonders will be writing about the
'miraculous rebirth' of forests and wildlife. Pro tip: forests evolved to burn
regularly. Nature!

~~~
donavanm
I suspect the articles point is more the scope, frequency, and magnitude of
these changes. The fires are just one symptom. The city of Sydney being down
to 40% of its water supply, and plausibly down to 20% this year. The Murray-
darling basin is, bluntly, fucked.

And regards to your “pithy” comment I do believe you’re off base. FWICT
ecologists, biologists, and foresters are at a bit of a loss. We’re losing
territory that simply _doesnt burn_ in the normal cycle. To quote myself, _The
fires have been much larger and hotter than typical. The vegetation that does
regrow probably wont be the same as we lost, ie pyrophillic scrubland
replacing forrest. The fires are also destructive enough to destroy pyrophytic
plants that would resist previous bushfires. Both of these are going to
disrupt the regrowth of the ecosystem in unexpected /abnormal ways. Concern is
that it leads to a long term cycle of more, hotter, larger fires and permanent
habitat loss._

