"Currently, buildings and infrastructure are directly responsible for almost one third of Australia’s total carbon emissions, and indirectly responsible for over half of all emissions." (Report: Embodied Carbon Projections for Australian Infrastructure and Buildings). Yet Labor and the Greens, who pretend to want to reduce emissions, have forced this malignant planning program on us.

Australia’s construction-frenzy, fueled by a relentless influx of migrants, is set to lock in a staggering 247 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO₂e) over the next five years, according to Infrastructure Australia’s recent report. Buildings alone churned out 21 Mt CO₂e in 2023, with transport infrastructure (10 Mt CO₂e) and utilities (5 Mt CO₂e) piling on the damage. This isn’t progress—it’s a carbon catastrophe dressed up as economic necessity, driven by a government hell-bent on inflating population to justify endless concrete towers and sprawling highways. The report’s rosy promises of emissions cuts are a flimsy distraction from a brutal truth: our growth obsession is strangling the planet.

The report admits that buildings and infrastructure account for nearly a third of Australia’s direct carbon emissions and over half indirectly, with upfront embodied carbon—emissions from manufacturing materials like concrete and steel—contributing 7% of the national total in 2023. With net migration at 400,000 in 2022–23, pushing a 2.5% population spike, the demand for new housing and infrastructure is skyrocketing. The result? A projected 37–64 Mt CO₂e annually, totaling 247 Mt CO₂e by 2030, locked in the moment these projects are built. Unlike operational emissions, which can be trimmed with renewable energy or efficient tech, this embodied carbon is a permanent scar, etched into the earth before the first tenant moves in.

The report dangles a carrot: a 23% reduction in upfront emissions by 2026–27, or 9 Mt CO₂e, equivalent to 2% of Australia’s 529 Mt CO₂e in 2022–23. This hinges on “like-for-like decarbonisation,” swapping high-carbon materials for greener alternatives—think low-carbon concrete or recycled steel. Sounds nice, but it’s a pipe dream. Scaling these materials in three years demands massive investment and supply chains Australia doesn’t have. Low-carbon concrete costs more, recycled steel is scarce, and developers, drunk on profit, aren’t keen to foot the bill. The government’s track record—slow, toothless regulations—doesn’t inspire confidence. That 9 Mt CO₂e cut is a drop in the bucket against the 247 Mt CO₂e tsunami, a token gesture to pacify critics while the construction-frenzy rages on.

Then comes the report’s final sleight of hand: “further significant emissions reductions” through “design optimisation” and “less-build strategies.” Translation? Build 'smarter'—use less concrete, more timber, or designs that last longer—and build less, by retrofitting old structures or cramming people into high-density urban hubs.

But here’s the rub: high-density isn’t the green savior it’s cracked up to be. Sure, it uses less land per person than suburban sprawl, but those gleaming towers guzzle carbon-intensive materials—21 Mt CO₂e from buildings in 2023 alone. They also demand vast external resources: energy for elevators and cooling, water from energy-hogging desalination plants, food trucked in from distant farms.

With Australia’s population ballooning, high-density cities just shift the footprint elsewhere, not shrink it. Sprawl’s no better, chewing up land and tying people to cars, but pretending high-density solves the problem is a lie. Both are fueled by the same growth fetish, and neither escapes the 247 Mt CO₂e trap.

The report’s “less-build” pitch—retrofitting, reusing buildings, or planning denser cities—sounds good but crashes into reality. Retrofitting is underfunded, dwarfed by the billions poured into new construction for economic “stimulus.” Developers and governments thrive on the construction-frenzy, not conservation.

Immigration, deliberately ramped up to drive demand, ensures more towers, more roads, more emissions. The report’s vague “significant reductions” lack targets or timelines, a rhetorical dodge to avoid admitting the obvious: you can’t build your way out of a carbon crisis while stoking population growth.

Alternative energies, like renewable-powered manufacturing, could help, but Australia’s construction sector is still chained to fossil fuels, making this a distant fantasy by 2026–27. This isn’t just bad policy—it’s pernicious.

The construction-frenzy enriches developers and their political allies while locking in emissions that will haunt us for decades.

High-density dogma, sold as sustainable, masks a cycle of profit over planet, displacing the environmental cost onto supply chains and future generations. The report’s half-hearted solutions—9 Mt CO₂e here, “significant” cuts there—are a smokescreen for inaction, papering over a system that prioritizes growth over survival.

It’s time to rethink the madness. Stabilize population growth instead of chasing endless expansion. Fund retrofitting to revive existing buildings, not bulldoze them for shiny towers. Prioritize local supply chains to cut the external footprint of urban sprawl, whether it’s high-rise or suburban. And demand policies that put carbon reduction over corporate greed. Australia can’t afford to keep building its way into a hotter, heavier future.

 

See below for the original report, which this article criticises.