Canada's northern wildfires projected to slow global warming — at a high cost
The rising impact of blazes in Canada and Siberia's boreal regions over the next 35 years will slow warming by 12 per cent globally and 38 per cent in the Arctic, according to recent climate modelling research at the University of Washington (UW). But the study's authors warn that while the study may sound positive, it's just one part of a trend that overall spells major trouble for northern ecosystems.
Boreal forest fires affect the climate as smoke particles scatter sunlight back into the atmosphere. These particles, or aerosols, also attract water droplets in clouds making them more reflective — reducing warming trends during the summer in northern areas, said lead author Edward Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, a UW research associate professor of atmospheric and climate science.
This effect outweighs other factors like the heat the fires themselves release, or the warming that occurs when black soot falls on white ice or snow, absorbing rather than reflecting sunlight, he said. It also outweighs the planet-heating effect of the carbon dioxide released by the fires.
Previous climate models haven't accounted for the increasing scale of wildfire events in boreal forests over the last decade in Canada and Siberia, said co-author Dargan Frierson, a UW associate professor of atmospheric and climate science.
The team used the Community Earth System Model (CESM) in the study but hope other climate models and scientists will incorporate the new approach to improve accuracy and understanding of boreal fires impacts, Frierson said.
However, while the findings show wildfires mitigate global warming it doesn't significantly change the overall trajectory of the climate crisis, the authors said.
The rising impact of blazes in Canada and Siberia's boreal regions over the next 35 years will slow warming by 12 per cent globally and 38 per cent in the Arctic, according to recent climate modelling research at the University of Washington (UW).
'It's an oversimplification to call the study a good news story because large boreal fires still have severely negative impacts on human health and on forest biodiversity,' Blanchard-Wrigglesworth said.
'The most significant takeaway of the study is that how boreal forest fires evolve in the next few decades matters for climate, especially in northern regions, and that we need to better understand the process.'
If the intensity of boreal fires drops naturally, or due widespread fire suppression or the climate cooling effect would likely fade within a few years, Blanchard-Wrigglesworth said.
'We need to do more research to address this question,' he said.
Warming in other regions like the tropics or southern hemisphere where some of the most severe climate change impacts are expected won't be significantly buffered by boreal fires, he added.
'The primary cause of climate change is the burning of fossil fuels, which remains the primary driver in our new simulations and still drives significant warming,' Blanchard-Wrigglesworth said.
Frierson agreed, saying the study results don't reduce the need to slash carbon pollution as fast as possible.
The cooling effects of boreal wildfires only slow the runaway truck of climate change, Frierson said, noting wildfires carry huge costs for people and wildlife that aren't captured in the study.
The scale of boreal wildfires like those Canada experienced in 2023, when more than 15 million hectares were razed and 200 communities had to be evacuated, bordered on 'apocalyptic,' Frierson said.
Smoke from Canadian wildfires this season is already reaching Europe, prompting air quality alerts in the US, and displaced thousands of people in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
'These [boreal fire] impacts that lead to less warming actually happen due to pretty catastrophic situations,' Frierson said.
'We need to take even more rapid action on climate, because that's the only way to get rid of both the fires and much more significant warming.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
6 days ago
- CTV News
How University of Waterloo researchers are attacking kidney stones with a tiny robot army
Anyone who has had kidney stones knows the pain can be intense, and the treatment is neither quick nor painless. But University of Waterloo (UW) researchers are developing a new minimally invasive procedure that could change all that. 'A lot of the therapies involve oral medication. So people go on oral medication, have to take pills and maybe a couple of times a day for several months,' said Veronika Magdanz, an assistant engineering professor from UW overlooking the work. That's not always effective or efficient. Surgery is another route. 'When it gets really acute and these stones are, for example, blocking the ureter, the surgeons will have to go in and remove those stones,' said Magdanz, who is also the director of the Medical Microrobotics Lab at UW. A lot of times once people get kidney stones, they're more susceptible to getting them again. So the UW researchers were approached by a urologist in Barcelona, who was looking to get patients relief in a less invasive way. 'He said, 'hey, you guys are doing these wireless microbots. Is there maybe a way that you could locally trigger the dissolution of stones by bringing medication or a reaction close to the stones in the urinary tract, causing the dissolution and then thereby avoiding longtime medication or even surgery,'' said Magdanz, recalling the question from the urologist. It may seem like an obscure request but it wasn't for the UW researchers. The answer from them was: 'Yes, there is a way.' Afarin Khabbazian, who was a master's students when she worked on the project, showed CTV News their method. 'We set up a rotating magnetic field using a permanent magnet, which is attached to a motor. We control the position of the magnets using a robot arm,' said Khabbazian. 'When I move [the arm], the [microbot] will move with it.' The microbots are made up of thin spaghetti-like strips fitted with magnets, which are moved into place near uric acid kidney stones with the robotic arm. The soft strips contain an enzyme called urease, and once in place, it reduces the acidity of the surrounding urine, which then dissolves the stones until they are small enough to pass naturally in a few days. 'This is definitely the first of its kind for kidney stones,' said Magdanz. The medical breakthrough is extra special for Khabbazian because she has suffered from kidney stones. 'The first time I saw the robots move was one of the best days of my life,' Khabbazian said. The technology is still in the testing phase and needs more work before moving on to human clinical trials. Still, it's not a small feat for a very small robot.
6 days ago
Moving to a more walkable city pays off for health, scientists find
People who moved to a walking friendly city walked more, and at the brisk pace favoured to improve health and prevent disease, a new natural experiment shows. Walkable cities allow you to access more amenities on foot for daily life, like going to school or work, buying ingredients to make dinner or heading to the park to play. But that's not available to everyone, given many cities and suburbs in Canada and the U.S. have been designed to emphasize transit by car, urban planners say. Teasing out cause from effect — whether walkable cities lead people to move more or if people who like to walk tend to live in more pedestrian-friendly cities — is important to nail down because it could help encourage more investment in safe sidewalks and zoning to encourage physical activity, medical researchers say. To find out, Tim Althoff, a computer science professor at the University of Washington in Seattle, used data from a step-tracking app to compare daily steps of more than 5,400 people who moved between major U.S. cities. In short, we found that your city can help make you healthier, Althoff said. The design of your city impacts how much you walk and as a result, your health. Paul Sharma of Peel Public Health says the region is working to improve the walkability of Mississauga and Brampton's sprawling neighbourhoods. Photo: CBC / Craig Chivers Althoff and his co-authors said in this week's issue of the journal Nature (new window) that moving from a less walkable city to a more walkable one adds about 1,100 steps a day on average. It's something the computer scientist has seen first-hand. I grew up in a rural area in Germany, Althoff said. I've lived in California and now in Seattle. Personally, I'm a really big fan of public transit, but I also, for instance, intentionally move to a neighborhood where it would be close to a bus stop. Canadian and international guidelines recommend adults get 150 minutes or more a week of moderate to vigorous physical activity a week. The researchers found people who lived in more walkable cities were about twice as likely to accumulate those steps. Dr. Laura Rosella, a professor of epidemiology at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto, said several high-quality Canadian (new window) studies point to decreased risk of Type 2 diabetes, heart disease and prediabetes as well as mental health benefits from more walkable cities. Enlarge image (new window) Pedestrians walking in Old Montreal on a sunny day. The city has slowly increased the walkability of the Plateau neighbourhood, an urban planner says. Photo: Radio-Canada / Charles Contant We spend lots of money on the health care system, Rosella. This [walkability] is something that literally we could make small tweaks that could have a huge difference. To apply the findings in Canada's climate, Rosella said, policy makers would also need to take into account safety considerations, like clearing snow and ice on sidewalks. Benefits of mixed density Ahmed El-Geneidy, a professor in urban planning at McGill University, said it takes about 15 years to gradually make changes to neighbourhoods and change the culture so people walk around cities more. The whole idea is that you need to build high density beside the single family homes, El-Geneidy said. That's how areas like Montreal's Plateau neighbourhood encouraged people to walk to more destinations, like grocery shops, he said. WATCH | Urban renewal for Edmonton residents: Paul Sharma, director of chronic disease and injury prevention at Peel Public Health, said Mississauga and Brampton's sprawling suburban neighbourhoods are sedentary places. Residents tend to have longer commutes compared to elsewhere in Ontario, according to the region's data. To design more walkable communities, Peel officials say they're working on factors like increasing density, proximity to services, and making wider sidewalks with better lighting and shade. This is where public health and local planners need to work closely together to improve the health of the residents, Sharma said. At a playground in Calgary's Crestmount residential neighbourhood, Jarek Soltys said the family chose the location to be close to the mountains and walking paths, where they get steps in for enjoyment, but not transportation for errands. When we moved here seven years ago there really wasn't anything here at all, not even a convenience store so we knew we would be driving places, Soltys said. That is the reality of the suburbs in a big city. Amina Zafar (new window) · CBC News · Journalist Amina Zafar covers medical sciences and health care for CBC. She contributes to CBC Health's Second Opinion, which won silver for best editorial newsletter at the 2024 Digital Publishing Awards. She holds an undergraduate degree in environmental science and a master's in journalism. With files from CBC's Alison Northcott and Melanie Glanz
National Observer
08-07-2025
- National Observer
Lightning strikes the Arctic: What will it mean for the Far North?
So far, the detection networks that count lightning strikes around the world have seen only a vague hint of an upwards trend in total global lightning. But in the north, the story is different. In the Arctic, there has been a far more dramatic upsurge, with one report finding that north of the 80th parallel (passing through the top of Greenland), recorded lightning events went from around 100 per year in the early 2010s to more than 7,000 in 2021. Historically, 'the Arctic basically didn't have lightning at all,' says Robert Holzworth, a retired atmospheric physicist with the University of Washington in Seattle. 'Now it's got a lot more. It's easy to see that.' Researchers are now scrambling to get a better sense of how much lightning will increase in the north, and what that will mean for people, local ecosystems, and the global climate. Will more lightning spark more fires, or will more rain — also brought by climate change — dampen them? And is what's happening in the north an aberration, or does it signal change across the rest of the planet? In 2014, UC Berkeley atmospheric scientist David Romps famously calculated that lightning strikes increase by about 12 percent per degree Celsius of global warming, which could add up to a 50 percent increase by 2100. This estimate was based on just two main factors, which Romps showed were tightly linked to lightning across the continental United States: precipitation and 'convective available potential energy,' a measure of air instability. More rainclouds (with water and ice particles bumping up against each other to create electric charge) and more convection beget more lightning. But as scientists have considered other factors, they have produced a wider variety of lightning forecasts. One of these factors is the amount of ' graupel ' in clouds: These tiny soft bits of hail increase clouds' electrical charge. Another factor is air pollution. The dirtier the air, the more lightning. When Covid struck, for example, the reduction in air, road, and shipping traffic led to cleaner air, which slashed global lightning rates by about 15 percent. In 2022, changes to shipping pollution regulations similarly caused a huge reduction in lightning strikes over shipping lanes. Because of all these complexities, along with the fact that climate models typically struggle with small-scale phenomena like thunderstorms, lightning forecasts frequently disagree. Some even predict that global lightning might decrease, not increase. There is 'a large knowledge gap in the prediction of future global lightning activity,' says Yuzhong Zhang, an atmospheric chemist at Westlake University in Hangzhou, China. The World Wide Lightning Location Network records between 600,000 and 800,000 lightning strikes every day around the globe, or more than 200 million per year. This network, which has been running since 2004, picks up very-low-frequency radio waves created by lightning, which bounce off the ionosphere and travel around the globe. By detecting this signal at a handful of the dozens of global stations, and timing them to within nanoseconds, researchers can triangulate where and when lightning struck. The WWLLN (pronounced 'woollen') catches only about 30 percent of global lightning, missing a lot of little strikes but detecting 80 percent of high-energy strikes. Other local or commercial networks catch more strikes, but WWLLN has the longest and most consistent global dataset available to researchers. Jed Kaplan, an earth system scientist at the University of Calgary who combs through the WWLLN data each year, says that as of 2022 there were no clear trends in the global lightning data — though more recent data, he says, suggest a hint of an overall increase. In the Arctic, however, there are more solid signs. Holzworth's 2021 study of WWLLN data found that from 2010 to 2020, warmer summers saw more lightning hitting above the 65th parallel (around the middle of Alaska). The hottest year in this stretch, 2019 (which was globally 0.93 degrees Celsius warmer than the 1951-1980 average), saw three times more lightning in the Arctic as a fraction of the global total than the coolest year, 2011 (which was 0.65 degrees Celsius warmer). In other words, a 0.3-degree Celsius bump in global temperature came with a tripling of Arctic lightning. That's just for one 10-year stretch, cautions Holzworth, and it isn't clear that this trend will continue. In fact, he says, his as-yet-unpublished analysis suggests that lightning has dipped a bit in the Arctic in the last few years. Yet the Finnish weather company Vaisala, which runs its own lightning detection network, has seen an even more dramatic spike in the Far North. Its 2022 report says that while lightning strike numbers have remained steady up to the 65th parallel, researchers saw in 2021 nearly twice as many lightning events (including both lightning within clouds and lightning that strikes the ground) north of the 80th parallel than in the previous nine years combined. More lightning doesn't always lead to more fires, notes Kaplan. Fires require not just an ignition but also a lot of dry fuel to burn. The vast majority of lightning strikes in the tropics, but it comes with heavy rains that prevent fire. In some places, including in the United States, the majority of wildfires are started by human carelessness or equipment malfunctions, not by lightning. But in high latitudes, lightning is the main cause of large fires, so an increase in lightning activity in the north is cause for concern. The Alaska Fire Science Consortium is tracking what's going on in Alaska. The peak fire activity there occurs in June, as long, sunny days dry out 'duff fuels' — decomposing litter, lichen, and moss — and lightning storms hit more frequently. Those conditions stretch into July. By the end of July, Alaska tends to get more rain, dampening fires. The consortium's 2025 report notes that Alaska is getting warmer — the summer average is now more than 54 degrees F, compared to about 52 degrees F in 1970. It's getting wetter too, but not, for now, fast enough to offset the effects of warming on fire. And lightning is increasing: There has been a doubling in lightning strikes in Alaska's western interior over the past 10 years. 'We know that from the networks, but also from local people — not just the elders but middle-aged people — who have noticed things changing,' says Thoman. Much of Alaska has historically been too dry for lightning; now it is tipping over the edge to having just enough moisture in the air to form thunderstorms, Thoman says. All these factors have together led to more frequent large-fire years in Alaska. 'The big fire seasons are roughly doubling in frequency,' says Thoman. Lightning plays an important role in that. In 2015, for example, Alaska saw more than 50,000 strikes over a three-day period (more than a third of the state's annual average of 120,000 per summer), and it experienced its second largest fire season yet, with more than 5 million acres burned. Fire is a natural part of the northern ecosystem. But the new fire regime comes with hotter fires, says Thoman, which can incinerate rather than activate the seed cones of fire-adapted trees. Burning duff creates a huge amount of smoke, which is problematic for people who live downwind. And the burning of trees, which sometimes never grow back, can strip the landscape of shade and speed up permafrost melt, which releases methane — a powerful greenhouse gas. One recent study forecast that lightning strikes could more than double by 2100 in tundra and boreal forest areas that are underlain by permafrost. This, the authors write, could increase the area consumed by wildfire by more than five times and release large quantities of methane. Permafrost thaw isn't well represented in climate models, so the amount of greenhouse gas that might be released this way is unknown. 'There's not enough attention on this in my opinion,' says Thoman. There's one reason, though, to think that more lightning might help mitigate possible boosts in methane: by changing the chemistry of the atmosphere. In 2021, researchers flying planes over Colorado and Oklahoma to study the air during lightning storms were startled to find that strikes produced massive amounts of oxidants — more than 1,000 times the amount they were expecting to find. These oxidants — hydroxyl and the hydroperoxyl radical — are known to scrub away methane, acting like a kind of atmospheric cleanser. The effect can be dramatic, as Zhang and his colleagues learned by studying the reverse dynamic: a sharp increase in methane that occurred during Covid. The team calculated that the global decline in lightning — due to reduced traffic and air pollution during the pandemic — caused a dramatic 2 percent global reduction in hydroxyl in 2020, as compared to 2019. At the same time, atmospheric methane increased by about 15 parts per billion in 2020 — one of the biggest annual spikes ever seen and more than 50 percent greater than the rise in 2019. A host of different theories have been put forward to explain this methane boost, including industrial leaks and wetland emissions, but the lightning theory is powerful: Zhang estimates it could account for about half of the spike. For now, no one knows the likely magnitude of either effect. If lightning strikes continue to increase in the Arctic, or elsewhere, how much will that boost methane or mop it up? Thunderstorms, says Holzworth, play a hugely important role in moving ions and molecules around in the upper atmosphere, and the impacts of that activity on climate change are complex and unknown. 'These are pieces of the puzzle that need to be solved.' Holzworth thinks that in places where there's little lightning now, 'there will be more – maybe even in the Antarctic,' he says. 'But it's not so clear. The weather dynamics are changing.'
