We can’t control the weather. We can barely predict it. But even if we could predict better (which we must), how do we deal with it, especially when the weather is likely to be hotter and more extreme? Historically and culturally, we have thought about the monsoon and the rains. We now think about heat. Part of rising heat is blamed on climate change, but there’s much more that causes the impacts we face, ranging from urbanisation and housing design to work timings. Those are things we can alter according to the weather.
The British dealt with Delhi’s heat by simply moving the summer capital to Shimla. We can’t move people to the hills en masse. So, a cynical answer would be we need more air conditioning. But that will need more energy, which in the short run will mean more fossil fuels burned, which will worsen global warming. The economic limitation is most telling: Most Indians don’t have air conditioners. Many people don’t have coolers, and some don’t even have fans.
Before we can think of dealing with the issue — for which a fancy term is adaptation — it’s important to know what we’re up against. Climate change models state that the world has breached 1.5°C temperature rise and is likely to break the 2.5°C rise, if not more. While this may not sound so dire — after all, the daily weather goes up and down by many degrees — this is the average global temperature rise, including over water. Models indicate that the rise over land will be higher, and this is before considering local or regional impacts.
On top of this, urbanisation brings two challenges for heat. First, we have urban heat islands, where materials and density (and less vegetation) mean more heat. Second, we have dramatic differences in housing design between historical (often rural) houses and modern multi-story dwellings, often apartments. These are not designed for ventilation, nor optimally oriented/shaded.
So, we will have to plan for much more heat. The problem is we think of dealing with heat as an individual problem. We would do much better if we thought of it as a collective problem, even though people’s starting points and ambitions naturally vary across society.
If we think of all the problems rising temperatures create, be it loss of productivity (both human and crops), heat stress (including mental stress), loss of species, increased fire risks, disease spread, etc., these require more change than individuals can or should do alone. We need a societal plan. The country does have a National Cooling Action Plan (NCAP), but this focuses on a subset of what needs to be done (we need to make energy efficiency an attractive and important proposition as the traditional supply-side solution of providing “more”). One problem is our energy systems aren’t designed to earn more revenues or profits by selling less. Terms such as air quality and AQI have entered our zeitgeist. Similarly, we need an awareness and discourse around heat. We need to declare “red days” for heat where we cannot just continue with business as usual. Modern life is almost 24×7. While we cannot expect schools or shops to close for the day due to heat, can we change working hours so that midday is a rest period? Culturally, where are our head coverings like the famous cowboy hats, sombreros or nón lá (the conical hats of Vietnam)?
If we do ask people to take it easy at midday, one challenge is conflicting objectives. In many places, public parks are closed at midday, because they don’t want people eating or sleeping there. But such havens can be life-saving, especially for those who are outside the home and don’t have access to cooled shelters.
Another reason handling the heat will be a societal problem is that our main adaptations are energy- (and water-) intensive. A small saving grace is that midday is when solar power should be ubiquitous (and less expensive). Can we “pre-cool” our homes at midday to last through the evening? Unfortunately, most homes do not allow that, and many “modern” glass facades aren’t designed for heat — no shadings, and high heat gain. One design update is needed immediately: Contrary to popular belief, insulation of buildings is no longer just for cooler climates. Of course, we could go all the way and design homes like traditional buildings with high ceilings, natural ventilators and thick stone walls. But such designs aren’t compatible with taller buildings. Moreover, builders have low incentives to worry about energy usage or efficiency. At a minimum, we should be painting roofs white (or with special paints that reflect away more heat).
Going forward, it’s not just the temperature per se that we have to worry about. It’s also the duration of high temperatures and the lack of night-time cooling down. Higher temperatures mean more hydration, but the poor struggle with access to water. Public policy remains hamstrung because the elite and even the middle class continue to have “exit strategies” — they aren’t individually as burdened by heat (because of ACs), poor power supply (back-up power), poor quality water (aquaguard/RO/borewells), or even poor AQI (stay indoors/air purifiers).
Ultimately, however, we need to tackle heat through what we don’t want but what we need. That means investing in not just cooling, but also food security, productivity, efficiency, and health. All those ministries and departments will need to incorporate heat into their planning.
The writer is a Senior Fellow with the Centre for Social and Economic Progress (CSEP). All views are personal
