SUBMISSION
TO THE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION
AND
BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION BILL 1998
Date: early March 1999
FOREWARD
Surveys consistently show that Australians
want their Federal Government to have more power to act decisively to protect
the environment. However, the Government has clearly surrendered powers to the
States by replacing Commonwealth environmental laws with three new Acts. One of
the most regrettable features of the proposed Environment Protection Act is the
overwhelming reliance which the Commonwealth is placing on the State Based
Environmental Assessment Procedures (EIA), thereby ceding Commonwealth power to
the States. Whilst the proposed Biodiversity Act seeks an integrated framework
for biodiversity protection it fails to address climate change, vegetation
clearance or land degradation.
The failure of the Federal Government to
address climate change in the EPBC Bill is one of the major concerns of
environmental groups. Given the abundance of empirical evidence now available
stressing the need to address climate change, it is irresponsible for the
Federal Government to fail to give a positive lead to the States. Rather, the
States have been encouraged to adopt a "business as usual" approach
because of the example given by the Federal Government, by lobbying for more
lenient conditions for greenhouse emissions for Australia in Kyoto in 1997.
It is proposed in this submission to
illustrate how the issue of climate change, if left to the States without
strong Federal leadership on the matter of global warming, has the potential
for disastrous effects on a section of Port Phillip Bay coastline.
"Since the Kennett government’s election
to office in 1992, environmental strategic innovation has slowed dramatically.
There are no strategies to tackle critical development related issues and there
is an absence of strategies for dealing with climate change, greenhouse gas
emissions and the impending catastrophic impacts of ecologically unregulated
urban growth. Crucially there has been no attempt to update or replace the
State Conservation Strategy, instead policies initiated by the previous State
Labor Government have been quickly curbed or abandoned" (1).
Despite authoritative studies in the last
decade on the impact of global warming, the Liberal governments, both Federal
and State, have adopted a "business as usual" attitude and proceeded
in Victoria with urban development proposals on flood prone land and in coastal
areas which are described in numerous reports and studies as being the most
vulnerable locations in the event of storm surges.
GLOBAL WARMING
"Global warming is an issue that both
developed and underdeveloped countries must act on, but wealthy countries – the
United States, Canada and Australia, with 5.5% of global population, but which
generate 28% of greenhouse gas emissions, have an obligation to show leadership
in the interest of our environmental survival" (2).
Whilst the "business as usual"
attitude to the problem of global warming is the easy option, it ignores the
fact that scientific opinion is increasingly being backed up by empirical
evidence. Nine of the warmest years since record keeping began have occurred
since 1983. The twelve months that ended in May 1998 were the planet’s warmest
on record, the cause according to most scientists and an increasing number of
world leaders, is carbon monoxide emitted from coal fired power stations and
car exhausts (3).
It should be noted here that Victoria’s
Premier (Jeff Kennett) will shortly be opening a $1.7 billion freeway - City
Link. In a deal done with the State government, it is claimed "There is
nothing in the City Link Concession Deed which precludes the development of
other transport infrastructure, including a rail link to Melbourne
Airport." (4)
Of course the Government cannot be
‘precluded’ from developing public transport. But if it does it will have to
pay compensation to Transurban, thus commuters will be encouraged to or be
trapped into using a costly (both in terms of construction and use) toll road,
and at the same time will be contributing to global warming through car exhaust
emissions.
Recent reports state that global warming has
been pinpointed as a cause of losses from the west Antarctic ice sheets adding
weight to predictions that climate change will cause the sea level to rise (5).
There are claims that under water ‘acidic rain’ caused by steadily rising
levels of carbon monoxide in the atmosphere has a serious impact on the Great
Barrier Reef (6). Dr Barrie Pittock, a leading CSIRO scientist at the Division
of Atmospheric Research, states that the 1997 Kyoto agreement to reduce
greenhouse pollution by developed nations would do little to reduce the
magnitude of threats to the Reef (7). Dr Pittock has also studied the impact of
climate change on Port Phillip Bay so it is appropriate now to examine the
effect on one of the most vulnerable sections of the Bay coastline and the
storm surges which are likely to increase as a result of global warming.
STORM SURGES
Storm surges are temporary elevations or
depressions in sea surface height driven by surface winds and changes in
atmospheric pressure. Their severity depends on the strength and duration of
the atmospheric disturbance and structure of the coastal terrain. Severe storm
surges can cause inundation of low lying coastal plains and flooding of river
systems. Combined with wind generated wave action storm surges can contribute
to coastal and estuarine erosion (8).
Parallel flooding situations can also be
prolonged or worsened by storm surges. This can occur when the atmospheric
storm responsible for the storm surge also produces extreme rainfall, or if a
storm surge generating system occurs soon after a severe rainfall event. In
either circumstance, the storm surge can elevate sea levels in the vicinity of
river outflows, thereby reducing the drainage rates and contributing to the
flooding of river systems and flood plains (9).
The set of circumstances referred to above
occurred in 1994 in a section of Port Phillip Bay from Mentone to Frankston
when heavy rainfall, westerly winds and a King tide combined to cause severe
erosion of the Mentone, Parkdale and Aspendale foreshore and flooding upstream
in Mordialloc creek. Global warming has resulted in stormier weather and a
greater number of severe storm surges on the eastern side of Port Phillip Bay.
In 1996, the Environment Protection Authority
modelled three sections of the coastline of Port Phillip Bay and highlighted
the sensitivity of the region to an array of prevailing wind directions. In
general, the western side of the bay was less sensitive to wind strength
changes than the eastern side since storm surges tend to be caused by westerly
winds. Considerable sensitivity was apparent within the Mordialloc section
(10).
The report states that an event such as the
1934 floods which produced both extreme rainfall and storm surge could cause
failure of the existing flood protection system, therefore leading to far
greater flooding.
It is worth noting that approval is being
given by the local council for two residential developments on the flood plain
on the north bank of Mordialloc creek. One development is for 700 houses, and
the other, on the former Epsom racecourse for 500 houses. The Epsom racecourse
flooded to a depth of two metres in both the 1934 and 1952 floods.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT
A CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research
report states that: "The inundation of land by the sea and the predicted
average sea level rises will have sufficient obvious consequences to
immediately raise interest in the subject of coastal impacts and management and
includes a wide range of possible first order impacts that need to be
considered. These are:
Each of these impacts carries with it
secondary impacts which in a particular area, relate to the continued viability
of urban land use or natural ecosystems.
In regard to the eastern side of Port Phillip
Bay, planners must be cognisant of the climatic, sea level and direct carbon
dioxide effects that might influence their predictions. They need to commence
site-specific studies which are required to integrate the complex interactions
of sea level rise and climate change into useful predictions for the future
(11).
Dr Pittock adds further evidence with his
report into the greenhouse effect. He claims that: "Coastal management,
depending on the magnitude of the sea level rise, may be greatly affected.
Remedial action could be extremely costly, with major capital works necessary
to protect low lying areas and especially water-front buildings and marinas
near coastlines. Beaches and holiday resorts may be badly affected"
(12).
What needs to be remembered is that although
both of these scientists are suggesting that sea level rises might not be
apparent for a decade, global warming is causing climate change which is
already having an effect on the vulnerable eastern Bay coastline through more
frequent and more severe storm surges.
Should further confirmation be required as to
the effects on the fragile coastline, the Victorian Coastal Vulnerability
Study 1992 highlights the fact that the most vulnerable area in danger due
to storm surges is the section of the Bay from Mentone to Frankston and yet
this is the area that the present government is promoting for tourism, medium
density housing, aquaculture and marinas. The accompanying article and photos
are evidence of the erosion problems which have occurred in previous storm
events (13).
CITY OF CHELSEA - GREENHOUSE STRATEGY
REPORT
The (former) City of Chelsea report describes
the effects of climate change and the issues confronting this bayside council
in the event of storm surges and beach erosion, something which the council had
to address in 1970 when foreshore structures were destroyed in severe storm
events. This study raises important issues of who is responsible when bayside
residents suffer property damage as a result of storm events (14).
The estimated value of residential land near
the Foreshore Reserve in the City of Chelsea in 1990 was estimated to be $150
million but would be worth much more today. It is obvious therefore with the
impact of climate change predictions that there is a need to address planning
issues which could otherwise lead to law suits against. Council if losses to
real estate occurred in the future.
Quoted in this report are the proposed
actions of the former Victorian Labor Government with regard to financial
responsibility for storm damage. "The Government strategies for dealing
with rising sea level could range from;-
The document advised that options for
minimizing damage and destruction would be identified and eventual government
commitment to protective works on public or private property determined after
consideration of issues such as the extent of erosion, economic factors and
costs, and joint private and public funding.
The protection and maintenance of the public
coastal reserve would be given high priority, but no commitment was given as of
right to the protection of private property at Government cost. The Government
report also advises measures would be introduced to ensure that "inappropriate
coastal development does not occur in future".
In contrast to the forward looking policy of
the previous Labor Government, the State government today through its Victorian
Coastal Strategy, is encouraging medium density residential development in this
and other sections of the Port Phillip Bay foreshore and is approving the
construction of marinas and restaurants on sections of the foreshore. In the
City of Kingston, some existing structures on the foreshore are to recycled as
cafe/kiosks, despite the fact that Mentone, Parkdale and Aspendale beaches have
been renourished at considerable cost.
A consequence of climate change for bayside
councils could be alterations to public liability insurance cover. The cost of
premiums estimated in the case of the recent Wollongong flood victims was said
to be $3000 dollars per annum.
Dr Bird claims in his report Effects of
sea level rise in Port Phillip Bay that:
"The probable extent and effects of the
predicted sea level rise should be taken into account in planning new coastal
developments, on modifying existing structures where these are intended to
persist for more than a few decades. This applies particularly to low-lying
sectors on the east coast of the Bay between Mordialloc and Frankston
and from Safety Beach to Portsea as well as the area around the mouth of the
Yarra. Careful planning will be necessary to maintain existing areas and values
on the coastal fringes of Port Phillip Bay"
Unfortunately, seven years on, there has been
no evidence of ‘careful planning’ by the present State government, encouraged
by the "business as usual" attitude of the Federal government at
Kyoto in 1997. The Kennett government’s policies do not address the long term -
possibly decades ahead, but appear interested only in quick profits in the
short term.
This submission has been an attempt to
demonstrate through research, long-time experience and observation, the effect
of storm surges on a vulnerable section of our local environment. We have noted
that in the seven years since the Kennett government’s election to office that
many authoritative reports and accumulated local experience concerning threats
to the coastal environment have been ignored in policy formulation in favour of
a development-at-all costs agenda.
This mentality won't change unless the
Federal Government resumes control of such nationally significant issues as
climate change and introduces legislation that will ensure that the States as
well as the Federal government adopt realistic and principled policies to make
certain that Australian greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to
present this submission.
Author: M. Rimington
END-NOTES
1. Christoff, P. (1998) "Degreening Government in the
Garden State: Environment Policy under the Kennett Government, 1992-1997"
in, Environment & Planning Law Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1, Feb.
2. The Age (1998) "Leadership needed to help save
the planet" in, The Age, August 15.
3. Darby, A. (1998) "Glacier pointer to global
warming" in, The Age, July 25.
4. Low, N. (1995) "Some big holes in City Link
‘facts’" in, The Age, October 28.
5. Darby, A. (1998) "Glacier pointer to global
warming" in, The Age, July 25.
6. Hogarth, M. (1998) "New threat to Barrier
Reef" in, The Age, May 2.
7. ibid.
8. Environment Protection Authority (1996) Extreme
events and the impact of climate change on Victoria’s coastline: Report to EPA
and Melbourne Water (Publication 488), Environment Protection Authority /
State Government of Victoria, Melbourne, p. 4.
9. ibid., p. 5.
10. ibid., p. 64.
11. Pearman, G.I. (1986) "Climate change and coastal
management" in, Planner, Dec.
12. Pittock, B. (1987) "The greenhouse effect"
in, Engineers Australia, Feb. 6.
13. Coastal Investigations Unit – Port of Melbourne
Authority & Environment Protection Authority (1992) Victorian Coastal
Vulnerability Study.
14. City of Chelsea (1990) Greenhouse Strategy Report,
Nov.