In 1987, I parachuted in with other smokejumpers to fight an Oregon wildfire that had a lot of folks particularly worried -- and for good reason. It became known as the Silver Fire, the largest in a complex of wildfires ignited by some 1,600 lightning strikes in the parched forests between Northern California and Southern Oregon, requiring what at the time was the largest mobilization of firefighters in U.S. history. The Silver Fire eventually burned about 96,000 acres -- roughly 150 square miles.
The following year, Yellowstone burned up. Instead of firefighting that year, I was a Congressional policy analyst working on climate change issues. Given what I'd experienced the year before and what was happening in Yellowstone, I was worried about the future effects of climate change on wildfires.
That fall, I joined experts gathered at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, for a workshop on Wildfire Severity and Global Climate Change. I told the workshop participants of my first-hand experience fighting fires, and my growing concerns that Americans were not responding adequately to the threat of climate change.
That workshop was conducted almost 25 years ago. The threat only has grown since then, yet decision makers in Washington have lagged in their response -- even when the smoke signals couldn't be more visible.
The High Park Fire in Colorado burned 87,284 acres last month, becoming the second largest fire in the state's history. The Whitewater Baldy Complex fire burning in New Mexico is the biggest on record in that state. Last year, the Wallow Fire grew larger than any other in Arizona's past; and a record 3.5 million acres burned in Texas.
These fires reflect unprecedented conditions. Atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases are the highest they have been in at least 800,000 years, largely the result of rapidly growing use of coal, oil and natural gas. That is pushing global temperatures to record levels. In 2010 they were the warmest on record. The last 12 months have been the warmest on record for the U.S.
The rising temperatures have driven drought conditions dominating much of the Southwest since 1999. In Colorado, spring temperatures are increasing while spring precipitation is declining. This spring was the second warmest on record and fourth driest. By mid-June, the water content of snowpack in the state's river basins ranged from one to nine percent of average.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program recently concluded: "Human-induced climate change appears to be well underway in the Southwest." It reported that in the West "both the frequency of large wildfires and the length of the fire season have increased substantially in recent decades, due primarily to earlier spring snowmelt and higher spring and summer temperatures."
Fire suppression budgets have grown accordingly, from 13 percent of the Forest Service budget in 1991, to roughly half its budget in 2009.
Every firefighter is expected to know the ten "Standard Firefighting Orders" developed to reduce firefighting risks. "Post lookouts when there is possible danger," says one of them. The orders are supplemented by 18 "Watch Out Situations" that should raise immediate concerns among firefighters on the line. "Weather is becoming hotter and drier," is one such situation. "Safety zones and escape routes not identified" and "Taking a nap near fireline" are others.
These guidelines are just as relevant to reducing the risks climate change as they are to reducing the risk of firefighting. Our lookouts are in the scientific community, and they are sounding the alarm. The Southwest is becoming hotter and drier -- a watch-out situation. Cities and towns across the Southwest are close to the fireline, feel the impacts and hear the warnings. A growing number of them are responding, showing leadership where the federal government does not.
Alas, many of our elected representatives in Washington are napping on the fireline. They need to wake up and smell the smoke. They need to take climate change seriously. They need to help Americans cope with the impacts we're feeling now, and prepare for the impacts that will grow more disruptive in coming decades. And they need to reduce the risk of catastrophic consequences from climate change in the longer-term through policies that help us reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.
Nick Sundt is a climate change expert at World Wildlife Fund (WWF), and is a former smokejumper in the Western U.S. - jumping fires from New Mexico to Alaska from 1980 to 1990.
Frances Beinecke: Health Hazards of Heat Waves, Wildfires and Other Extreme Weather
Jeremy Symons: What Is Causing Our Climate to Unravel?
Kevin Grandia: 10 Reasons Clean Coal Is Offensive
Rabbi Arthur Waskow: Why Is Colorado Burning?
Climate change: 'This is just the beginning'
EU Ministers to Discuss Funding Climate Change Adaptation, Water
This is what global cooling really looks like – new tree ring study shows 2000 years of cooling – previous studies underestimated temperatures of Roman and Medieval Warm Periods
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/10/unexplored-possible-climate-balancing-mechanism/#more-67179
This article opens up a whole new vista into the relationship between CO2 levels, oceanic plant growth and the complex relationships that we have yet to learn about in the field of climate science. If phytoplankton respond like most plant species do, we may find that the modest increases in CO2 levels we have experienced over the last 50 years may actually create a bounty of micro plant growth in the oceans, which would in turn create the food supply necessary to support an increase in the oceans’ animal population.
At the same time, it would explain where the excess atmospheric CO2 has been going; much of it converted into additional biological matter, with only a limited existence as raw CO2.
'This is what cooling in one part of Scandinavia looks like.'
1) Build  millions of miles of bike and horse paths
2) Replant diversified forests, grasslands and hedgerows
3) Tear down derelict buildings and parking lots and plant urban farms
4) Retrofit all buildings
5) Build light rail and trollies
6) Clean up every creek, stream, river, lake, beach
7) Put solar hot water and micro wind on all buildings
8) Develop clean energy
9) Put water catchment on all buildings
10) Modernize water, sewage systems
11) Put all power lines under ground
Here's where much of the money has gone that could create millions of these jobs:
CEO salaries
Shareholder profits
Campaign financing
Campaign contributions
AND
Hoarding money
Outsourcing and firing
Buying their own stock
Robotizing
Then there's just the will to shift from a consumer/manufacturing 'growth economy' to a 'growth' economy that regrows, regenerates, repairs, redesigns, refurbishes and restores. In other words A Great Renewal.
I keep thinking how strange it is that right wingers keep asking scientific questions about past climate. You can get those answers by Googling. I've given them here too many times to waste any more of my time. I don’t think the right wing is interested in scientific answers. They seem satisfied getting the factoids from right wing cranks and fake experts.
It is bizarre that the right wing which seems to have the least amount of science information somehow have the strongest convictions. Doesn't that fly in the face of common sense?
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity."
~ ecothumbprint
Allow the fires to burn to get rid of the death undergrowth......
So, given the choice, it is simpler to deny, and eliminate the worry that may be prompted by the thought of the consequences of inaction.
Global warming is as real as it gets, and it never stops to baffle me to hear people talk about it as some kind of left wing hoax...
Even if it doesn't help, it is certainly not gonna hurt to cut back on fossile fuels and try to come up with more green energy sources.
Nick and Al feel'in fly on their G-6.
[Roll eyes]
Great plan.
Really good conservative idea.