Here’s Why Wildfires Will Only Get Much, Much Worse

The combination of climate change and land development has explosive consequences.

The Historic Round Barn burns in Santa Rosa, Monday Oct. 9, 2017. (Kent Porter / Press Democrat)

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

So far, the Northern California firestorm currently burning its way through Napa and Sonoma Counties has killed at least 15 people, torched at least 1,500 homes and other structures, and charred more than 100,000 acres of land. Fanned by strong and dry “Diablo” winds, the fires materialized in a matter of hours in the evening of October 8, forcing more than 20,000 people to hastily leave their homes. As of Tuesday afternoon, approximately 150 people are still unaccounted for in and around the burned out areas, and the fires continue to burn with little to no containment.

But what could become California’s one of most costly firestorms ever is only the latest in one of the country’s most destructive fire years on record. So far this year, fires in the United States have burned about 8.5 million acres of land, 42 percent more than the typical average of acres burned year-to-date over the last 10 years, and about same amount of land area as New Jersey and Connecticut combined, according to the National Interagency Coordination Center. 

Climate change is a major contributing factor in the uptick of firestorms. As our planet continues to warm and weather patterns become more unstable—and as humans keep developing more land—experts expect that devastating fires like those currently searing across California’s wine country will become the norm, not the exception. 

“Climate is really running the show in terms of what burns,” Park Williams, a bioclimatologist at Columbia University, wrote for a recent study. “We should be getting ready for bigger fire years than those familiar to previous generations.”

Indeed, in many places, fires are already becoming more frequent and intense. Since 1970, the average fire season length has grown about 78 days longer in parts of the American West and Alaska, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. Earlier spring snowmelt has been linked to a dramatic uptick in western wildfire activity since the mid 1980s. And bioclimatologist Park Williams’ study, released last year, concluded that human caused climate change is responsible for doubling the amount of land burned in the American west since 1984. 

By the end of the 21st century, scientists predict that more than 60 percent of the Earth’s land will be more vulnerable to wildfire than it is today, mostly in mid-to-high latitudes like the American West.

So why does climate change promote fires? One reason is that it’s just hotter than it used to be. Shorter cold winter periods and higher temperatures in spring and summer mean that vegetation and soil have more time to dry out than they have in the past, lengthening the time of wildfire season.

Eric Sagara, a journalist who’s reported extensively on wildfires, also points out the changing winter precipitation patterns can prompt the growth of more fire fuel.

“We’ve always seen pendulums,” said Sagara. “But the dry periods are getting drier, and wet seasons are getting wetter. During the wet period, plants flourish. Then the dry period comes and dries everything out.”

Sagara’s pendulum analogy describes exactly what’s happened in California over the past year. With roughly 90 inches of rain, last winter was officially the wettest rainy season on record across several spots in Northern California. The winter rains put an end to California’s five-year-long drought, and launched almost all of the state into most verdant spring in recent memory.

But the summer that followed was oppressively hot—the hottest on record in parts of Northern California that are currently burning, according to NOAA’s National Centers For Environmental Information:  

3-Month Divisional Average Temperature Ranks

Since the winter rains ended, much of California has been bone dry. Summer and fall are traditionally dry seasons in California, but this year has been drier than usual:

The winter rains promoted more vegetation growth, much of which dried out in the record heat and became kindling for the current fires.

The other big component to wildfire risk is the fact that humans continue to develop land in what’s called the “wildlife-urban interface,” defined where “human development meet[s] or intermingle[s] with undeveloped wildland,”  and “where wildfires have their greatest impacts on people.”

Across the United States, 99 million people live in WUI, largely in suburban developments built over the last 60 or so years, not unlike the ones burned to the ground on Monday in Santa Rosa, California. Higher population density means a greater chance of fires starting in the first place—some 84 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. And fires in these areas are often deadlier than those in wilderness areas because more people are exposed to the flames and smoke. What’s more, structures can serve as kindling.

Mike Davis, a journalist and historian who has written extensively about fire and land use in California, points out that while climate change increases the risk of wildfire, human growth into wildfire-prone areas exacerbates the issue even further.

“Climate change is so dangerous because we’ve put billions of people and trillions of dollars of property directly into harm’s way,” he said. “What we’re seeing now is the lineage of bad decisions coming around, biting us, and threatening to devour us.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate