As Matt Stoller pointed out at Open Left, environmental groups haven't been very quick off the mark in responding to the California wildfires and framing them as a climate disaster. Whether it's Katrina, Rita, the 2003 wildfires, 2004 Florida hurricanes, or any of the numerous other climate disasters of recent years, environmental groups have been slow. It's true that you can't tie any particular climate disaster directly to global warming -- but it's easy enough to acknowledge that and then talk about how these kinds of disasters will become more frequent and more intense as the climate crisis worsens ... and then turn the conversation to solutions.
(photo: Kevin Labianco, Flickr)
Mostly, environmentalists have been timid because they're afraid right wingers will accuse them of "exploiting" the tragedies, but environmental groups shouldn't decide what to say or not say on the basis of a few fringe anti-environmentalists. Framing these events as climate disasters directs the conversation and forces the media to address the question, rather than continuing with the "Mother Nature strikes again" stories they usually run. If we let the right wing define what we say, we'll be 100 percent mute, 100 percent of the time. It's kind of a ridiculous strategy.
You've got to talk when people are paying attention. It's nice to release thoughtful, hard-hitting reports about how the climate is increasing the likelihood of wildfires during the rainy season. But it really doesn't matter if no one cares when the report is released. You've got to drive the point home while people actually care about wildfires (same true for hurricanes, droughts, etc.).
Let me give an example. In 2003, I was working on forest protection. Then, as now, some environmental groups didn't want to say that either the climate crisis or logging of fire-resistant old growth trees was contributing to the massive burns, even though they had put out loads of reports about it. Why not? They were scared they'd be accused of exploiting tragedies.
But for some reason, the right wing had no similar fears. They blamed the fires on environmentalists, saying that environmentalists had prevented thinning of low-diameter trees. The environmental community was so scared by that line of argument that the environmental messaging was, "Yes, we need tree thinning -- just not deep in the forest." Not surprisingly, few members of Congress and few members of the public remembered the distinction. The result: passage of Bush's Orwellian Healthy Forests Initiative, which actually subsidizes the logging of fire-resistant old growth trees.
Here's the solution, and it's something the environmental movement has to start creating right away: a Climate Disaster Rapid Response Team. When disaster strikes, environmentalists should be the first on the scene delivering aid in coordination with the Red Cross and other disaster relief agencies. It probably means having relief supplies around the country ready to go in the event of a disaster, and volunteers signed up in advance to drop everything and help with relief. And it means having a crack communications team ready to hook up media with both top environmental spokespeople and climate experts. The media will lap it up, and drown out whatever right wing sniping occurs.
It's important to remember that the right responds like this whenever disaster strikes. They're right to do it: that's when people are looking for solutions. After September 11, while the left was generally cowed into submission, Republicans rallied support around everything from the Patriot Act to tax cuts and the war in Iraq. They've blamed the drought in Georgia on environmentalists for mandating water-flows to save downstream fish (ignoring the fact that Georgia officials had allowed amusement-park snow-making and more sprawl than the water supply could take).
If environmentalists want to be effective at shaping the debate in moments of crisis, they're going to have put aside their temerity and start talking when people are actually listening.
UPDATE: Wanted to give some credit to environmentalists/groups who jumped on the fires. We still need a more comprehensive and organized effort like the one described above, but these statements are good first steps! This is far from an exhaustive list: LCV's Gene Karpinski, Friends of the Earth's Brent Blackwelder, Al Gore, the Sierra Club's Carl Pope, and NRDC.
Activist groups rally support for climate bill
Frogs in the forest: the new canaries in the coal mine
Comments View as Flat
odograph Posted 11:21 am
24 Oct 2007
Chaparral and Fire
I'm slow to accept a strong or obvious GW linkage to our California fires. We've had them here all life. Not only do I remember dads up hosing off roofs as the hills burned, I remember learning that the plants in our hills are evolved for fire.
So sure, let's investigate the linkage. Let's try to see what fraction of the problem might be GW, what part might be land use and land management, what part might be invasive species ... and what part might be natural.
(The GW linkage might be more pronounced somewhere else, some place where fire is 'foreign.')
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 12:10 pm
24 Oct 2007
Fire bad...
Odograph I hope you and our brothers and sisters near the burning areas of SoCal are OK. Good point about the chaparral.
I think Glenn was saying that many predict more crazy weather, not necessarily in one place, and maybe downright boring if you're in a drought. How should the government respond and why are these right winger jack-asses being so difficult?
Because we're (well some of us) leftie environmentalists, no other reason!
But I've always been a voice of moderation. The reason why the Farmer's Almanac became popular was because they predicted it would rain, sleet, hail, and snow in the vicinity of Boston. They nailed it. The Farmer's Almanac also recorded a year when it was so cold the water wells were still frozen solid in early June.
People have a fascination with the weather and you can't tell if one year it will rock'n'roll or be boring as heck. It is completely human. /sam
Onward through the fog
Permalink
odograph Posted 12:29 pm
24 Oct 2007
science
I think the science will put weightings on various factors, including GW. If we are lucky some of that nuance will make it through the press.
(forgot to mention 'arson' above. sadly that one weighs heavily out here, year after year.)
I actually work 5 miles from that picture above, about a mile from the nearest evacuations ... but they seem to have kept the fire out of the city proper on this fire, and lost some of those neat canyon homes ... the ones I've always thought about pricing, and always wondered if they'd just burn up once I owned them.
Permalink
SMM Posted 12:56 pm
24 Oct 2007
Zone changes 1990 - 2006
I recently came across this Arborday zone map showing the differences in US temperature zones since 1990. http://www.arborday.org/media/map_change.cfm
Something I notice is that the LA - San Diego region has graduated to "zone 10" since 1990.. and this is where many of the fires are concentrated.
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 11:49 pm
24 Oct 2007
exploitation, global warming, fires
EXPLOITATION
"...environmentalists have been timid because they're afraid right wingers will accuse them of "exploiting" the tragedies..."
I'm a bit weary of the right's tendency to accuse people of "exploiting" tragedies. For example... we cannot criticize a war during the build up for war (helps enemy resist), during the war (undermines morale), after the war (the war is over, let's move on), or decades later (stop trying to open old wounds or "revise" history).
Basically, when are people allowed to connect an awful event to potential causes so we can prevent the same event from happening again???!!!
The time to fgure out what is happening in Califonia is NOW, while it is still a new story!!! As soon as the fires are extinguished, the nation, the voters, our representatives in governemnt will forget all about the event and say we have more important things to do than worry about who or what contributed to the fires in California. No one wants to "play the blame game", but we desperately have to develop a habit of examining horrible events, including a bit of personal and national introspection, in order to prevent futures disasters.
GLOBAL WARMING AND FIRES
As someone pointed out above, there is a long history of natural fires in the area in question. The dominant ecosystem actually depends on fire. Human beings seem very resistant to the notion that fire is as natural and as significant as other natural forces in shaping the landscape. Sort of strange, given that we actually use it as a tool for clearing brush, rejuvenating pastures for livestock, and other activities.
I have to wonder if environmentalist are zeroing in on the wrong problem here. Rather than link global warming to the fires in California, you might want to consider linking urban sprawl to the fires in California. If people were not pushing development into naturally dry areas, areas swept by hot dry winds every fall -- it's a natural cycle that was here long before humans contributed so much extra CO2 to the atmosphere -- there would not be a problem.
There are places humans just can't build structures, unless they are willing to invest in safety measures and proper landscaping around their homes, and expect to live unaffected by ancient natural forces.
Another victim of Jean-Paul Marat's ghost and his virtual guillotine?
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 12:42 am
25 Oct 2007
Firestorm
I heard the term "firestorm" used in the media a few times.
What was the CNN logo (now conveniently gone)? Something about the planet?
The whole tabloid arson theme is the media attempt to deflect talk about GHG climate disaster. The governator is taking the firefighter love theme to calm the corporate masters. Sponsors do not like that CNN logo.
Fauxnews even played the terror card. Linking these fires to a terrorist warning from 2002. pretending it was just issued before the fires.
The real topic is the huge cost of this disaster. And that this was only thousands of acres that burned and thousands of homes. A real firestorm, that feeds itself with hurricane force wind, does not extinquish until the fuel is gone or mother nature provides extinquishing torrential rain. Costing 100s of billions?
Meanwhile only homeowners with million dollar mansions, who can afford to sue insurance companies, will get help. It's trailers for the rest of US.
Isn't it far more cost effective to reverse GHG climate disaster and reduce fire danger by recycling potential fuel for the fire like brush from logging? Amory lovins just agreed with me on a recent science channel presentation. Renewable energy will not cost more than fossil and nuclear, it will cost far less and impell an economic boom as well.
Wait for disaster, with unbearable cost, or act now with renewable technology and economic growth? Ask people who need good jobs now that most of their former jobs have been moved offshore, I bet they would choose action on renewable energy now.
That's the real story behind the fire coverage. Mass delusional media serves it's corporate sponsorship in deflecting attention from the GHG disaster aspect.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 12:51 am
25 Oct 2007
Israeli contractors
An Israeli version of Blackwater was working security during Katrina, with assault rifles. Any of those guys from Blackwater or one of the foreign corporations contracted for security in the fire disaster?
Any russian mercenaries? According to Bremer, Blackwater is immune to Iraqi law. Are foreign security contractors working in the US, immune to our laws?
It's what 007 had in fiction, a license to kill, or torture, or pretty much do anything they want.
And now a security contractor is building an Abu Ghraib for illegal immigrants on the southern border. Guess which contractor is building this private prison payed for with tax dollars? Will they hire a contractor guard crew from El Salvador, who are immune to US law?
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
odograph Posted 3:35 am
25 Oct 2007
thanks
Thanks for the update. I'll have to review those in more detail. On the surface Carl Pope seems to be the one who gets it. Well, the NDRC comes close, but calling for Federal funding is a bad idea. If houses on the fringes of chaparral lands need management, why not their owners?
FWIW, I tried to track down actual ignition causes for some major/recent California fires.
The best link I found for solid data was with the InciWeb for California (incident management system).
Permalink
odograph Posted 3:38 am
25 Oct 2007
one benefit ...
My nephew doesn't have to go to school today ... "fire day"
Permalink
ecopioneer 1 Posted 9:34 am
25 Oct 2007
eco fire relief
No one has talked about the idea of aiding in the relief, wasn't that the point of the commentary? Is too overwhelming of a suggestion to even consider how to go about it?
FYI, Brookstone corporation is located in San Diego Ca. don't call them now cause they are busy fighting the fires. They are the leading relief agency in the country with 10 caches of equipment across the country for disaster relief. They were on the ground in New Orleans on day 2 after Katrina struck. Strike up a conversation with them instead of starting somthing from scratch.
Regarding the media suggestion, is this a publicity stunt or somthing real? No wonder right wingers get their way. Try to provide a real solution instead of somthing to create a sound byte and you might be able to stand up to all their charges.
I think it is a great idea but, make a difference , not noise.
The planet will be fine, save your ass!
Permalink
SMLowry Posted 9:35 am
25 Oct 2007
The whole picture
I think what we have to look at is the increasing number and severity of natural disasters and make tkhe connection to climate change that way. In this country alone, there's always something, and when you expand it globally, it's unbelievable. We've had a record number of "hundred year storms", "once in a lifetime" disasters, and dryer than, wetter than, hotter than "experts had expected" seasons. Sure they're all "normal" in that floods, fires, droughts happen and in some places they happen as a matter of course, like the fires in California at this time of year due to the Santa Ana winds. I heard that this year it's hotter and dryer than usual, though, and the winds are stronger, hurricane force in some cases. We need to understand that this is the way it is now and plan accordingly, including changing how and where we build and develop. We have to put a lot of effort into saving property when perhaps the home shouldn't have been there in the first place. Here in Maine increasingly powerful coastal storms are eating away at the coast line. Streets have disappeared and homes, some quite old - this wasn't a new development, were swept away. In some cases, people will rebuild, in others they can't. No one probably should. It's unfortunate and it's sad but it is the reality we live in right now.
Permalink
EarthRehab Posted 12:26 am
26 Oct 2007
Pledged Relief for Nature Conservancy
Press Release:
California Wildfires, Nature Conservancy needs support, EarthRehab to raise funds.
The Nature Conservancy is the largest protected land owner in the
World. 100% non-profit/ non-funded.
The Nature Conservancy and its properties in Southern & Central California are burning to the ground.
They are the front-line eco-foundation that will make it the priority to investigate how to prevent massive wildfires in California.
For the remainder of the 2007 year:
When an individual joins the EarthRehab campaign for only $10, and would like for the proceeds to support Nature Conservancy, we will route the funds to their California project.
More can be read regarding this foundation and the challenges here:
http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/cal ...
Join the EarthRehab campaign today, and help support the Nature Conservancy.
Go to http://www.mygreenlicenseplate.com
Thank you,
William Djubin
Founder
EarthRehab
Do what's right today, EarthRehab.com
Permalink
EarthRehab Posted 12:33 am
26 Oct 2007
We are on the same page, relief with proceeds
I hope that this is what you were seeking to find.
We sent this link to Grist News yesterday, but it has not been mentioned yet.
Understanding the Nature Conservancy and the challenges they face, to re-build a Habitat, you could assume that they need your support.
For the latest news regarding California and the Nature Conservancy goto http://www.nature.org
or visit our Foundations Portal at
http://www.earthrehab.com/plate.html
Do what's right today, EarthRehab.com
Permalink
peacefulloflove Posted 1:18 am
26 Oct 2007
This seems like a disastrous idea
The environmental community is already seen by many as a group of sanctimonious preachers; the last thing we need to do is seem like opportunists, pouncing on every disaster to advance our agenda. Let's work on creating a better message, rather than attempting to shove our message into people's faces while houses are burning down. I would suggest that our current message--we're all going to hell in a handbasket and we should feel guilty about everything we do--is the problem. Let's craft a more effective message. How about, hey, even if you don't believe in global warming, let's stop buying oil from foreign countries, let's clean up our air, let's create new jobs, let's make the U.S. into a green powerhouse, and let's make some money by doing all this!
Believe it or not, people live their lives and have infinite interests besides the environment. And if the only time they get an environmental message is when something calamitous is happening, well, I don't see how they are going to be moved to action. Pumping people with guilt gets them to listen (or, it may turn them off to the message) but it does not inspire action. Let's get a more positive message, and then people will listen because they will be inspired to act. Americans pride themselves on their can-do attitude; why not speak to that narrative?
We can do better than this.
Andy
Permalink
Larry london Posted 1:51 am
16 Jan 2008
global warming
Nobody ever factors in the heat produced by weapons in the various wars around the globe! Is this because the arms industries are so powerfull?
Permalink
WWAGD?! Posted 2:00 am
16 Jan 2008
Deobfuscated
http://searchsoftwarequality.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0 ...
Obfuscated:
Deobfuscated:
It's true that after 4 years of trying, we don't have a shred of evidence to support the IPCC or any of it's conclusions or predictions. But that won't stop us from trying to pull the wool over your eyes with a fast one. Such as, continuing to talk "as if" it were all due to global warming, even though we have no evidence. But, in a few years, you'll forget all that, and even though the weather will just great...really reall good in fact...we'll go around celebrating Al Gore Day on the 1st of May and talk about how New Orleans was flooded due to global warming.
My Log
Permalink