4 ms·

It's a matter of framing. We just have to move the discussion from "global warming increases wildfires, buy more EVs" to "global warming increases wildfires, le

It's a matter of framing. We just have to move the discussion from "global warming increases wildfires, buy more EVs" to "global warming increases wildfires, let's improve our forest management to manage the impact (while also fighting against climate change)".

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
graemep 3y ago
> "global warming increases wildfires, buy more EVs" There is a profit to be made from selling EVs. > "global warming increases wildfires, let's improve our forest management to manage the impact (while also fighting against climate change)" Better forest management IS fighting climate change. Well managed land can be a carbon sink whereas fires release huge amounts of CO2 and are damaging in many other says. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27353-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27353-x bout just one region of the world But doing this is costly and there is not much to be sold to do it. There is always a lobby for doing something that that means someone can sell something. For things that do not increase sales, particularly things that involve not doing things (e.g. no cutting down forests) there is no equivalent lobby.
- arrowleaf 3y ago
  Fighting wildfires is expensive, which means it's big business. There's absolutely business interests in keeping wildfires raging. Fire suppression means the government gets to purchase planes and helicopters, 3M can supply countless brand new sets of fire resistant gear every year considering how high wildland fire employee turnover is, Perimeter Solutions gets to sell Phos-Chek faster than they can produce it, etc.
  - graemep 3y ago
    Just to be clear, the point you are making is that there is a business opportunity in not having good land management.
    - arrowleaf 3y ago
      Yes. There's business interest in getting legislators/officials distracted from what is really good land management, namely prescribed fires and public services around clearing combustibles away from infrastructure and homes.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

graemep 3y ago

> "global warming increases wildfires, buy more EVs" There is a profit to be made from selling EVs. > "global warming increases wildfires, let's improve our forest management to manage the impact (while also fighting against climate change)" Better forest management IS fighting climate change. Well managed land can be a carbon sink whereas fires release huge amounts of CO2 and are damaging in many other says. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27353-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27353-x bout just one region of the world But doing this is costly and there is not much to be sold to do it. There is always a lobby for doing something that that means someone can sell something. For things that do not increase sales, particularly things that involve not doing things (e.g. no cutting down forests) there is no equivalent lobby.

arrowleaf 3y ago
Fighting wildfires is expensive, which means it's big business. There's absolutely business interests in keeping wildfires raging. Fire suppression means the government gets to purchase planes and helicopters, 3M can supply countless brand new sets of fire resistant gear every year considering how high wildland fire employee turnover is, Perimeter Solutions gets to sell Phos-Chek faster than they can produce it, etc.
- graemep 3y ago
  Just to be clear, the point you are making is that there is a business opportunity in not having good land management.
  - arrowleaf 3y ago
    Yes. There's business interest in getting legislators/officials distracted from what is really good land management, namely prescribed fires and public services around clearing combustibles away from infrastructure and homes.