Getting past the climate scapegoat, and taking steps that could actually make a difference
By Paul Driessen
The 2020 fire season is nearing its end. But monstrous wildfires
continue to rage across America’s western states, devastating towns and
habitats, and killing hundreds of people and millions of animals. Politicians
and environmentalists continue to rage that climate change is the primary
factor, allowing few responsible, commonsense forest management actions that
could actually reduce the risks.
Manmade climate change is a convenient scapegoat, but it cannot
be separated from natural climate
fluctuations and effects. Moreover, even assuming fossil fuel emissions play a
dominant role in the human portion of this equation – and even if the Pacific
Northwest or entire USA eliminated
coal, oil and natural gas – China, India and scores of other nations will not do
so anytime soon.
And they will certainly be using fossil fuels to
manufacture the wind turbines, solar panels and batteries envisioned by Green
New Dealers – and to mine and process the raw materials those technologies
require.
The key ingredient in these monstrous, devastating forest
fires is fuel. A century of Smokey the
Bear fire suppression, coupled with half-century bans on timber harvesting,
tree thinning and even insect control has filled western forests with dense
concentrations of brush, fallen branches, needles and leaves, skinny young
trees and huge older trees – many of them dead or dying – ready to be turned
into conflagrations under hot, dry summer and autumn conditions that prevail
most years in California and other western states.
It’s a recipe for disasters like the 1871 Peshtigo Fire, 20 miles north of where I
grew up in northeastern Wisconsin, on the very same day as the Great Chicago
Fire. Blistering flames a mile high moved south at 100 mph, creating “fire
tornados” that threw houses and rail cars into the air. Over a million acres of
forest were obliterated in two days; up to 2,500 people died, many of them
cremated into little piles of ash.
I also recall how American and British bombers deliberately
turned Hamburg, Germany into an inferno in July 1943. The first waves of planes
dropped “blockbuster” bombs that leveled arms factories and parts of the
city known to have mostly wooden structures. They were followed in subsequent
days by attacks with incendiary bombs, which turned the wood debris into a
firestorm, with tornado winds up to 150 mph, and temperatures of nearly 1500 F.
Operation Gomorrah killed over 40,000 people.
A few days ago, I picked up my latest
issue of Wired magazine. Daniel Duane’s 12-page article “The
fires next time” made a couple now-obligatory references to climate change,
but was one of the most detailed and insightful articles I’ve read on the
causes and nature of these horrific wildfires. He vividly explains why we are
witnessing a “trend toward fires dramatically more catastrophic” than in the
past.
Above all, the reason is fuel
buildup. CalFire, he notes, has some 75 aircraft and 700 fire engines, and is very
good at extinguishing thousands of wild-land fires annually. But CalFire has
virtually no fuel-management authority and must simply watch the trees and
other fuel get “more and more dense,” creating prime conditions for
ever-worsening crown fires that US Forest Service scientist Mark Finney says
are big because landscapes are full of tinder and long-burning, heavy fuels. Ditto
in other states.
More trees of course generate more
roots competing for the same water, further drying everything out. In
California alone, this and the 2011-2016 drought and pine bark beetles killed
150 million trees!
Another key ingredient, Duane writes, is the simultaneous
burning of many small fires (caused by multiple lightning strikes, eg) that
combine light and heavy fuels over a large area, amid mild ambient winds. “As
that broad area continues to burn with glowing and smoldering embers over many
hours, the separate convective columns of all those many little fires begin to
join into a single, giant plume.”
As hot air in the plume rises, air at its base is replaced
by air “sucked in from all directions. This can create a 360-degree field of
wind howling directly into the blaze ... oxygenating the fire and pushing
temperatures high enough to flip even ... giant construction timbers and mature
trees into full-blown flaming combustion. Those heavy fuels then pump still
more heat into the convective column.... [which] rises ever faster and sucks in
more wind, as if the fire has found a way to stoke itself.” The timbers,
branches and entire trees become “firebrands” that can be carried high into the
air, a mile or more from the primary fire, then dropped into timber stands and homes,
igniting still more firestorms.
Smaller blazes can be controlled,
even extinguished. But massive firestorms can be impossible to suppress, saving
homes equally hopeless. The primary order of business with mass fires is getting
people out of harm’s way, before escape routes are clogged, cars run out of
gas, and walls of flame close in.
That
means building more escape roads from communities through forests to safety,
even in the face of environmentalist opposition and lawsuits. Roads are far
less intrusive or harmful than conflagrations. Yet radical greens battle these roads,
while praising these unnatural conflagrations as “nature’s way.”
People lived in these areas long
before pressure groups, politicians and courts made conflagration conditions this
horrific. Actions need to be taken now to prevent more deadly fire cataclysms. That
has to begin with removal of diseased, dead and excessive trees and brush. It
will take years, decades even, and a lot of effort and money. But failure to
halt and reverse the buildup of fuel in our forests is undeniably irresponsible
– and deadly. Apache
Indian forestry programs prove sound management saves forests.
Blaming climate change is useless
and irresponsible. It means waiting 30-50 years or more, just to see if China
and India finally replace fossil fuels, perhaps with nuclear power – in the
hope that reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide actually reduces climate change,
droughts, extreme weather and infernos.
Policymakers,
land management agencies and regulators, Native tribes, community associations,
industry groups and less obdurate environmental groups should seek
collaboration and cooperation, especially on forest management and tree
thinning. This is already happening but needs to be expanded
greatly.
Educational
programs should teach homeowners how to harden and fireproof houses and other
buildings against small to midsized fires – and teach judges and politicians
the hard realities of modern fires. Above all, those with ultimately
life-or-death decision-making authority must understand that the price of bans
on timber harvesting and responsible forest management is too often measured in
homes and habitats obliterated, wildlife and humans killed, soil organisms
incinerated, soils washed away by rainstorms and snowmelts, and millions of
acres denuded and desolate for decades.
Tougher
building codes for new construction in these areas would save homes, heirlooms
and lives. Roofs especially should be made of fireproof or fire-resistant
materials. Special financing and low-interest loans would make such new homes
and hardened existing homes and buildings more affordable.
Local,
state and federal budgets are already stretched to their limits. Funding will
have to be redirected from other programs. Another approach could
require forestry work for welfare checks. Besides saving habitats and lives,
that would build skills, self-esteem and strong work ethics, improve physical
fitness, replace a sense of entitlement with a sense of accomplishment, and create
connections and opportunities
Another
source of funds could be billionaires like Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, who recently gave
$791 million to climate activist groups, as part of his commitment to his $10-billion Earth Fund. Certainly, helping to
stop these deadly fires – and the incalculable air pollution, soil erosion, and
habitat and wildlife destruction they cause – would be one of the boldest and
most effective actions anyone could take to protect Earth’s future, including
the majestic at-risk forests in his own backyard.
The bottom line is so simple we shouldn’t even have to state
it.
If we don’t act, nature will. We have created this massive
fuel-for-fires problem. We can and must fix it. Either we thin out trees, or nature
will – with devastating consequences. For people who claim to care deeply about
saving our forests for Bambi, spotted owls and other beloved creatures,
guaranteeing horrific infernos is quite literally a hellish way to demonstrate
our love for Mother Earth.
Paul
Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow
(www.CFACT.org) and author of books and articles on energy,
environment, climate and human rights issues.