Editorial: More air conditioners is not the same as preparing for climate change

Many Maltese watched news of Europe melting to a standstill with a smug sense of reassurance that well over 80 per cent of Malta’s households were air-conditioned, compared with the continent’s estimated penetration of just 19 per cent.

ACs in Malta have moved from luxury to basic necessity, with 84 per cent of residential dwellings having access in 2021, from 52 per cent in 2011 (a figure that is likely much higher today), according to the latest Census of Population and Housing results.

And, with temperatures forecast to hit sizzling this week, many will also hope that Enemalta’s multimillion investment in underground cables, new substations, and other upgrades will prevent a repeat of the prolonged power cuts that caused such misery in 2023.

Malta has become good at coping with heat, but this is not the same as being prepared for it. What lies ahead cannot be addressed with just another campaign urging people to drink more water and avoid the midday sun, important though that advice remains.

A recent report by Allianz economists found that heat stress events have multiplied sevenfold since the 1980s, while the average death toll per event has risen fivefold.

Most heat damage is not captured by the dramatic images of wildfires we have watched unfold, but accumulates through excess deaths, lost working hours, pressure on healthcare systems and stress on infrastructure not designed for prolonged heat.

The costs are already spreading beyond the thermometer. A Central Bank of Malta report last year found that hotter summers and rainfall shocks in Italy can feed inflation here, particularly through processed food, services and producer prices in food manufacturing.

Malta seems to be adapting by improvisation, not design, and this is the weakness exposed by each heatwave

This is where Malta’s climate debate needs to change direction. We continue to treat power cuts as an Enemalta problem, flooding as a roads issue and heat-related illness as a health problem, yet all are entries on the same climate bill; a bill Malta has still not fully measured.

The National Audit Office found that the government was still quantifying the cost of adapting to climate change. It also found that infrastructure and greening projects were generally not supported by comprehensive climate-proofing assessments, while existing plans did not always assign responsibility, deadlines or measurable targets.

Malta seems to be adapting by improvisation, not design, and this is the weakness exposed by each heatwave.

The Climate Action Authority’s National Plan for Climate Resilience, which covers 10 vulnerable sectors and is presently awaiting clearance from other government entities, must now fill that gap.

It must not become another catalogue of aspirations, but should identify the most urgent risks, cost the measures required, assign responsibility and set deadlines against which delivery can be measured publicly.

The government should also publish its Heat Health Preparedness Response Plan it says it has developed, setting out the warning thresholds used to activate each level of response, what measures follow and the public bodies responsible for delivering them.

Climate resilience cannot remain something that is added to national plans in a haphazard way after the main decisions have already been taken.

Major public projects should be required to show how they will withstand higher temperatures and heavier rainfall, while new public spaces should be designed with more shade, better drainage and water retention in mind. Future budgets too should spell out what climate change is expected to cost Malta, and how much is being spent to reduce that risk.

This is the minimum expected of a country that is not short of warnings or reports. This spell of extreme heat will subside, but the danger remains that the urgency will dissipate with it… until the next climate calamity.