The Fire Next Time: Why the West Keeps Burning

They looked like scenes from the end of the world. In 2020, California experienced its worst wildfire season in modern history.

There were nearly 10,000 fires.ⁱ

Over 850,000 people went without power. ⁱⁱ

Estimates of the economic damage went as high as $150 billion.ⁱⁱⁱ

The largest fire ... was the size of the state of Rhode Island.^iv

The consequences were catastrophic.

Even worse: We know how to keep this from happening.

Summer in America is a time for traditions. Gathering together for barbecues. Fireworks on the Fourth of July. Aaaand the western part of the country catching on fire.

In 2020, there were nearly 26,000 wildfires in the West, which burned 9.5 million acres.^v That’s the equivalent of burning down Switzerland ... which we don’t recommend because the Swiss will shoot you.

Now, a big chunk of this is pretty much inevitable, especially in California. The state is prone to droughts; it has a dry, Mediterranean climate; it gets strong winds that help fan the flames; and it has lots of eminently combustible trees and plant life.

California is basically built to burn. And it always has — even in the years before fires were started by people trying to create Instagram content.

That’s not a joke. In 2020, the state lost over 22,000 acres to a fire that burned for over two months ... because of a pyrotechnic malfunction at a gender reveal. ^vi

(It was a boy, by the way. Congratulations, Todd and Lisa!)

Scientists estimate that in prehistoric times, California was on fire so often that the amount of acreage that burned in an average year would qualify as a bad decade by today’s standards.^vii In the 1700s, smoke coming from the West was so thick that Americans on the East Coast worried it was the apocalypse.^viii

So, end of story, right? California just burns and we’ve got to learn to live with it.

Well, not quite. There are a lot of factors making it worse than it has to be. Over 2 million homes in California have been built near rugged areas “at high or extreme risk” from wildfires. ^ix And warming temperatures only compound the issue.

But those factors pale in comparison to the one that the vast majority of experts agree^x is the root of the problem: California isn’t on fire enough.

Sounds crazy, right? But here’s how it works.

If you live in a place that’s destined to burn, your only hope is to make sure there’s not enough fuel — things like logs, dead trees, or brush — to let those blazes get out of control. And the way you get rid of that fuel is by first thinning the forest and then setting small, planned fires at times and places where you can keep them under control.

Unfortunately, for a long time, the U.S. Forest Service opposed controlled burns. Although it didn’t seem crazy at the time. They were traumatized.

In 1910, a massive wildfire — fanned by hurricane-force winds—took out more than 4,500 square miles of Idaho, Montana, and Washington ... in a single weekend. It was so powerful that some of the soot ended up in Greenland.^xi

In the wake of that devastation, the Forest Service vowed to never let it happen again — and began a policy of trying to extinguish all fires as soon as they popped up. Which meant ... lots more kindling for future wildfires building up .

While the Forest Service has returned to doing some controlled burns in recent years, they’ve still got a lot of catching up to do. In 2015, it was estimated that there were 6.3 billion dead trees standing in western forests.^xii

What does that mean for California? In 2020, the state’s department of forestry said it planned to do controlled burns on 30,000 acres.^xiii The amount that experts say would be necessary to actually control the threat? About 20 million acres.^xiv

There are lots of reasons more isn’t being done. It can take years to get permits for these burns. Many property owners worry that controlled fires will break free and wreak havoc — although research shows they almost never do.^xv In fact, controlled burns are used throughout the southeastern United States, which has far fewer catastrophic wildfires as a result.^xvi

There are also worries about the environmental dimension. Californians are concerned about smoke and their government officials are wary of the carbon emissions.

But here’s the thing: The choice isn’t between fire or no fire. It’s between fire you control or fire that’s gonna whoop your a**.

Nothing could be worse than the status quo. The amount of smoke that comes from out-of-control wildfires has given California days where the air quality is five times worse than Beijing.^xvii

And if you’re worried about the carbon emissions from controlled burns ... consider the alternative. California’s renewable energy policies are estimated to save the state about 30 million metric tons of carbon emissions a year.^xviii The estimated amount of carbon emitted by just the 2020 wildfires alone? 112 million metric tons.^xix

California can’t go on this way. To avoid future catastrophes, it’s going to have to quite literally fight fire with fire. And if it’s successful, it just might mean getting control of California’s second-worst type of disaster ... behind the gender reveal parties. Obviously.