Why are historical conditions no longer enough when planning long-life infrastructure?
Kate Ross: Historically, infrastructure design has relied heavily on past environmental conditions. Today, that approach has its limits. Climate models suggest that floods, wildfires and other extreme events may occur more frequency and with greater intensity than historical records indicate. For owners planning infrastructure expected to operate for 75 or even 100 years, accounting for uncertain future conditions creates a significant challenge.
“You can't assume that today’s conditions, or even those from 10 years ago, will be the same tomorrow.” — Kate Ross, P.Eng., Mechanical Engineer and Project Manager
Owners and operators still need to make investment decisions despite that uncertainty. Designing for worst-case scenarios isn’t always financially realistic, particularly when public funding or ratepayer dollars are involved. The challenge is finding the right balance between managing long-term risk and making practical decisions today.
Vincent Clément: Historical conditions are only a starting point. Climate risk assessments must consider both current and future conditions to understand what could affect a project's performance over time.
Rather than trying to predict every possible outcome, infrastructure should be designed, where possible, to be robust, monitored and adaptable as conditions change. Considering climate risks early gives owners more flexibility to relocate a project, refine a design or implement mitigation measures before major investments are made. Resilience means being able to monitor conditions and adapt over time.
Which climate risks or impacts are most commonly overlooked?
Vincent Clément: Climate-induced events typically don’t result in isolated consequences. For example, wildfire is often viewed as a standalone event. However, some of the most significant impacts may occur after the fire itself. The loss of vegetation changes how water behaves across the landscape. The soil may no longer absorb water as effectively as it did before. What begins as a fire-related issue can quickly become a water management challenge. Increased runoff can lead to erosion and slope instability, creating additional risks for roads and other infrastructure.
“If we only assess an isolated risk, we may miss the secondary impacts that could affect the long-term performance of the asset.” — Vincent Clément, Senior Environmental professional
A wildfire can therefore create hydrological and geotechnical issues long after the flames are gone. It’s a cascading effect where interactions between risks play a major role in how we design infrastructures. Climate risks should be assessed as interconnected risks rather than isolated events.
Kate Ross: The impacts of climate risk can sometimes be overlooked. On a recent project, BBA evaluated the condition of a hydroelectric penstock that had been exposed to a wildfire. During the event, the penstock was left full of water. This helped preserve its shape and prevented significant heat-related deformation. At the same time, the additional weight caused the structure to move more during the fire, resulting in damage to penstock supports. If the penstock had been left empty, some of that damage may have been reduced.
This example highlights the importance of emergency planning and operational decision-making. Climate resilience often involves trade-offs, where reducing one impact may introduce another. Understanding those trade-offs before an event occurs can help owners make more informed decisions.
How can local and Indigenous knowledge strengthen climate resilience?
Vincent Clément: Indigenous knowledge brings a long-term understanding of the land that’s difficult to obtain through short-term studies alone. When combined with engineering and environmental assessments, it helps build a more complete picture of long-term risks and changing environmental conditions.
Climate resilience is strengthened by combining different sources of information to better understand how a site may respond to changing conditions over time.
Kate Ross: In northern and remote environments, Indigenous and local knowledge can provide valuable insight into site-specific conditions. On a solar project in a remote northern community, community members shared observations about seasonal ground conditions and recommended carrying out shallow excavations one season before deeper excavation work. This approach gave the ground additional time to thaw, helping facilitate construction in a permafrost environment.
“Indigenous communities shared practical knowledge about local ground conditions that helped inform our construction approach.” — Kate Ross, P.Eng., Mechanical Engineer and Project Manager
That knowledge also reinforced the importance of flexibility in the design itself. In permafrost environments, ground settlement can vary significantly, even across short distances. On the same solar project, rather than relying on a fixed racking system for the solar panels, we selected racking with adjustable legs and ground anchors that could accommodate future movement and be adjusted during operations. In environments where conditions continue to evolve, local knowledge can help engineers identify challenges early and design infrastructure that’s better suited to real-world conditions.
Preparing infrastructure for what comes next
Climate resilience isn’t about predicting the future perfectly. It’s about understanding climate risks early, identifying conditions that could threaten performance, assessing the consequences and designing infrastructure that can adapt to changing conditions. Whether dealing with permafrost in remote communities, increasing flood risks or the cascading impacts of wildfires, resilience depends on informed decision-making, adaptable designs and a long-term understanding of how environmental conditions may change throughout an asset's life.
