logo
Climate change is making fire weather worse for world's forests

Climate change is making fire weather worse for world's forests

Miami Herald21-07-2025
In 2023 and 2024, the hottest years on record, more than 78 million acres of forests burned around the world. The fires sent veils of smoke and several billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, subjecting millions of people to poor air quality.
Extreme forest-fire years are becoming more common because of climate change, new research suggests.
'Climate change is loading the dice for extreme fire seasons like we've seen,' said John Abatzoglou, a climate scientist at the University of California Merced. 'There are going to be more fires like this.'
The area of forest canopy lost to fire during 2023 and 2024 was at least two times greater than in the previous nearly two decades, according to a new study published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The researchers used imagery from the LANDSAT satellite network to determine how tree cover had changed from 2002 to 2024, and compared that with satellite detections of fire activity to see how much canopy loss was because of fire.
Globally, the area of land burned by wildfires has decreased in recent decades, mostly because humans are transforming savannas and grasslands into less flammable landscapes. But the area of forests burned has gone up.
Boreal forests lost more than two times the canopy area in 2023-24 compared with the period between 2002 and 2024, the study found. Tropical forests saw three times as much loss, and North American forests lost nearly four times as much canopy, mostly because of Canada's wildfires.
Significant losses were in remote forests, far from human activities. That isolation suggests that fires are increasing primarily because of climate change, said Calum Cunningham, a fire geographer at the University of Tasmania who was not involved with the study. 'Chronic changes in climate are making these forests more conducive to burning,' Cunningham said.
Climate's fingerprint on forest fires, particularly remote ones, can be obvious. That's because fires are limited either by how much there is to burn or by how wet or dry the fuel is. So, when scientists see more fires in remote forests, far from cities, infrastructure or other human activities, such as logging, they look to climate for an explanation.
Specifically, they look to fire weather.
Fire weather encompasses all the conditions that have to be right for a blaze to take off. Unrelenting spells of hot, dry weather and high evaporation rates let plants and soil dry out. Local wind patterns can shift, potentially pushing fires across a landscape, up and over hills and roads. Longer, hotter, drier stretches of fire weather make fires more likely.
Climate change is making severe fire weather more common around the world, raising the chances of worsened forest fire seasons, a study in the journal Nature Communications found. Previous work has shown that climate change is in many places making the fire season longer. But many studies that attribute climate change to fires are regional, not global.
The study assessed globally how much more likely extreme fire-weather conditions are to occur in the modern climate, compared with the preindustrial period, before greenhouse gas emissions rose significantly. The researchers used satellite observations of burned areas, along with weather data, to connect observed fire weather with actual occurrences of forest fires.
The chances of seeing extreme fire weather are roughly double in today's climate compared with the preindustrial period, the researchers found. Years with extreme fire-weather conditions had more forest fires and more carbon dioxide emissions than typical years without severe fire weather. Carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, acts as a blanket in the atmosphere, trapping the sun's heat and warming the environment.
Neither study's findings were particularly surprising to the experts, because most of the regions that the studies highlighted have burned in recent years. Both studies add to a growing body of evidence that points to climate change as one of the main reasons that the planet is experiencing more frequent and more severe forest fires, often overlapping.
'It really puts to bed any debate about the role of climate change in driving these extreme fires,' Cunningham said.
When more places are hit with fire weather at the same time, countries' capacities for sharing firefighting resources drop. 'You get stretched thin,' Abatzoglou said. Reduced firefighting can create a dangerous feedback loop: Bigger fires mean more emissions, which creates more fire weather and makes future fires more likely.
Budget and staffing reductions at science agencies in the United States, along with policy changes, can exacerbate climate-driven changes to fire trends, said Peter Potapov, an ecologist at the World Research Institute who led the PNAS study. For instance, repealing the 'roadless rule,' which banned roads in some remote American forests, could increase human activity there, along with fire risk. Terminated satellites could degrade fire forecasting. And funding cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development, a State Department program that has been largely dismantled by the Trump administration, ended a program that helped other countries improve their fire-monitoring capabilities.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Copyright 2025
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Scientists Built a Cell That Can Keep Time Like a 24-Hour Clock
Scientists Built a Cell That Can Keep Time Like a 24-Hour Clock

Yahoo

time8 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Scientists Built a Cell That Can Keep Time Like a 24-Hour Clock

"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links." Here's what you'll learn when you read this story: Our biological clock, or circadian rhythm, is immensely important to our health, and scientists are now unpacking the process's secrets at the cellular level. Researchers successfully created synthetic, cell-like structures, or vesicles, to test how varying concentrations of so-called 'clock proteins' affect the vesicles' natural timekeeping. The team—amongst other discoveries—found that clock accuracy was proportional to both the amount of clock proteins and vesicle size. One of the many biological wonders of life on Earth is the near-perfect ways our bodies can sense the passage of time. Known as our biological clock or circadian rhythm, this natural process regulates our wake-sleep cycle and is highly attuned to Earth's 24-hour rotation. To better understand this mechanism, scientists from University of California Merced attempted to reconstruct this clockwork system in cyanobacteria. The team created cell-like structures known as vesicles (each only 2 to 10 micrometers in diameter) and loaded them with 'clock proteins'—groups of proteins that play an important role in regulating the circadian rhythm. The results were published this week in the journal Nature this study, the authors used cyanobacterial clock proteins KaiA, KaiB, and KaiC. As describes, KaiC acted as the system's hub while the other proteins shifted the process forward and backward. The team then inserted the vesicle lipid with a fluorescent tag whose steady glow showed the circadian rhythm in action, and found that both vesicle size and the amount of 'clock proteins' were proportional to how well the vesicles could keep time. 'This study shows that we can dissect and understand the core principles of biological timekeeping using simplified, synthetic systems,' Anand Bala Subramaniam from UC Merced, one of the lead authors on the study, said in a press statement. When the proteins were reduced, however, the vesicles were no longer accurate timekeepers. The authors were able to reliably reproduce this gradual loss of timekeeping, and by building computational models of the vesicle population, the scientists also discerned that the circadian rhythm's additional role of turning genes on and off—in order to control physiological and behavioral processes—did not interfere with this timekeeping ability on the individual level, but proved essential for synching clocks across the population. 'This new study introduces a method to observe reconstituted clock reactions within size-adjustable vesicles that mimic cellular dimensions,' Mingxu Fang, a microbiologist from Ohio State University who wasn't involved with the study, said in a press statement. 'This powerful tool enables direct testing of how and why organisms with different cell sizes may adopt distinct timing strategies, thereby deepening our understanding of biological timekeeping mechanisms across life forms.' Understanding the ins and outs of circadian rhythm is immensely important, as the biological process—or the disruption of it—can lead to a variety of illnesses, including cardiovascular disorders and cancer. It can also impact the treatments for these diseases, and scientists have even explored a concept known as 'chronochemotherapy' to increase the efficacy of the drugs while limiting toxicity by carefully timing doses. The 24-hour clocks within our cells are the smallest on Earth, but they also might be the most important. You Might Also Like The Do's and Don'ts of Using Painter's Tape The Best Portable BBQ Grills for Cooking Anywhere Can a Smart Watch Prolong Your Life? Solve the daily Crossword

‘Forever chemicals' like PFAS found in eco-friendly branded menstrual products: new study
‘Forever chemicals' like PFAS found in eco-friendly branded menstrual products: new study

Hamilton Spectator

timea day ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

‘Forever chemicals' like PFAS found in eco-friendly branded menstrual products: new study

The results of a new study are disappointing for those choosing to be eco-friendly when it comes to their menstrual products. The study found 'forever chemicals,' also known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), were observed in some reusable menstrual pads and panties. According to researchers with Paul H. O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs and the University of Notre Dame, 59 reusable personal hygiene products from North America, South America and Europe were tested. It included pads, liners, underwear and incontinence underwear from North American companies like Knix, Jockey, Diva Cup, Aisle, Bambody, Cariona, MeLuna, Thinx, Uniqlo and more. Nearly 30 per cent of the samples were positive for PFAS, researchers found. 'Since reusable products are on the rise due to their increased sustainability compared to single-use products, it's important to ensure that these products are safe,' associate professor Marta Venier said in a press release . 'This is crucial, especially for adolescents and young women, who are more vulnerable to potential negative health effects. 'Feminine hygiene products stay in contact with the skin for extended periods of time, and the risks from the dermal absorption of PFAS, especially neutral PFAS, are not well understood.' As part of the study, 22 one-time use products were also included from various countries, with pads, panty liners and incontinence products tested from brand names like The Honest Company, Always, Kotex, O.B., Equate, Depend, TENA and Stayfree. In some cases, the products advertise they are 'natural,' 'organic,' 'non-toxic,' 'sustainable' or made using 'no harmful chemicals.' The authors chose not to identify PFAS concentrations by brand, but said more research is needed. This isn't the first time menstrual products have been under the PFAS microscope. A 2023 study has already shared PFAS chemicals are in some one-time use products like tampons, along with reuseable period underwear. 'Most surprising to the researchers was the presence of total fluorine in the wrappers for numerous pads and some tampons, as well as the outer layers of some of the period underwear,' the 2023 study noted. Researchers speculated PFAS was used in wrappers to keep the tampons dry prior to use, and they were in the outer layer of the period underwear to prevent leaks. 'Of course, you're concerned for the wearer, but we're also concerned about the ecological impact because PFAS are 'forever chemicals,'' principal investigator Dr. Graham Peaslee said in a press release . 'Once these products are thrown away, they go to landfills and decay, releasing PFAS into groundwater. And we, or later generations, could end up inadvertently ingesting them.' PFAS are made up of over 12,000 compounds that have stick, stain and water-resistant properties, the American Chemical Society said in the 2023 study. These forever chemicals are often found in many household products, including some food and food packaging and containers, non-stick pans, household cleaning products, some cosmetics and shampoo, and in fire extinguisher foam and carpets. PFAS are linked to serious health risks, Venier said. But not every product tested had the 'forever chemicals.' 'While further studies are needed to define the risk of PFAS exposure to human skin, the study's finding that at least one sample per category showed no intentional presence of these chemicals suggests that safer and healthier alternatives can be manufactured without them,' Vernier added. More people experiencing periods today are choosing eco-friendly products 'to combat the environmental impact of disposable products,' this study has found. Yet eventually, even reusable products will likely end up in landfills. 'Consumers should know that not everything that is in a product is listed on the package,' Venier said. 'Increased transparency from manufacturers would help consumers make informed decisions about what they're purchasing for themselves and their families.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

How FDA panelists casting doubt on antidepressant use during pregnancy could lead to devastating outcomes for mothers
How FDA panelists casting doubt on antidepressant use during pregnancy could lead to devastating outcomes for mothers

Yahoo

time2 days ago

  • Yahoo

How FDA panelists casting doubt on antidepressant use during pregnancy could lead to devastating outcomes for mothers

At a meeting held by the Food and Drug Administration on July 21, 2025, a panel convened by the agency cast doubt on the safety of antidepressant medications called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs, in pregnancy. Panel members discussed adding a so-called black box warning to the drugs – which the agency uses to indicate severe or life-threatening side effects – about the risk they pose to developing fetuses. Some of the panelists who attended had a history of expressing deep skepticism on antidepressants. SSRIs include drugs like Prozac and Zoloft and are the most commonly used medicines for treating clinical depression. They are considered the first-line medications for treating depression in pregnancy, with approximately 5% to 6% of North American women taking an SSRI during pregnancy. We are a psychologist certified in perinatal mental health and a reproductive psychiatrist and neuroscientist who studies female hormones and drug treatments for depression. We are concerned that many claims made at the meeting about the dangers of those drugs contradict decades of research evidence showing that antidepressant use during pregnancy is low risk when compared with the dangers of mental illness. As clinicians, we have front-row seats to the maternal mental health crisis in the U.S. Mental illness, including suicide and overdose, is the leading cause of maternal deaths. Like all drugs, SSRIs carry both risks and benefits. But research shows that the benefits to pregnant patients outweigh the risks of the SSRIs, as well as the risks of untreated depression. The panel did not address the safety of SSRIs following delivery, but numerous studies show that taking SSRI antidepressants while breastfeeding is low risk, usually producing low to undetectable drug levels in infants. The biology of maternal brain health Pregnancy and the months following childbirth are characterized by so many emotional, psychological and physical changes that the transition to motherhood has a specific name: matrescence. During matrescence, the brain changes rapidly as it prepares to efficiently take care of a baby. The capacity for change within the brain is known as 'plasticity.' Enhanced plasticity during pregnancy and the postpartum period is what allows the maternal brain to become better at attuning to and carrying out the tasks of motherhood. For example, research indicates that during this period, the brain is primed to respond to baby-related stimuli and improve a mother's ability to regulate her emotions. These brain shifts also act as a mental buffer against aging and stress in the long term. On the flip side, these rapid brain changes, fueled by hormonal shifts, can make people especially vulnerable to the risk of mental illness during and after pregnancy. For women who have a prior history of depression, the risk is even greater. Clinical depression interferes with brain plasticity, such that the brain becomes 'stuck' in patterns of negative thoughts, emotions and behaviors. This leads to impairment in brain functions that are essential to motherhood. New mothers with depression have decreased brain activity in regions responsible for motivation, regulation of emotion and problem-solving. They are often withdrawn or overprotective of their infants, and they struggle with the relentless effort needed for tasks that arise with child-rearing like soothing, feeding, stimulating, planning and anticipating the child's needs. Research shows that SSRIs work by promoting brain plasticity. This in turn allows individuals to perceive the world more positively, increases the experience of gratification as a mother and facilitates cognitive flexibility for problem-solving. Assessing the risks of SSRIs in pregnancy Prescription drugs like SSRIs are just one aspect of treating pregnant women struggling with mental illness. Evidence-based psychotherapy, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, can also induce adaptive brain changes. But women with severe symptoms often require medication before they can reap the benefits of psychotherapy, and finding properly trained, accessible and affordable psychotherapists can be challenging. So sometimes, SSRIs may be the most appropriate treatment option available. Multiple studies have examined the effects of SSRIs on the developing fetus. Some data does show a link between these drugs and preterm birth, as well as low birth weight. However, depression during pregnancy is also linked to these effects, making it difficult to disentangle what's due to the drug and what's due to the illness. SSRIs are linked to a condition called neonatal adaption syndrome, in which infants are born jittery, irritable and with abnormal muscle tone. About one-third of infants born to mothers taking SSRIs experience it. However, research shows that it usually resolves within two weeks and does not have long-term health implications. The FDA-convened panel heavily focused on potential risks of SSRI usage, with several individuals incorrectly asserting that these drugs cause autism in exposed youth, as well as birth defects. At least one panelist discussed clinical depression as a 'normal' part of the 'emotional' experience during pregnancy and following birth. This perpetuates a long history of of women being dismissed, ignored and not believed in medical care. It also discounts the rigorous assessment and criteria that medical professionals use to diagnose reproductive mental health disorders. A summary of the pivotal studies on SSRIs in pregnancy by the Massachusetts General Hospital Center for Women's Health discusses how research has shown SSRIs to not be associated with miscarriage, birth defects or developmental conditions in children, including autism spectrum disorder. The risks of untreated mental illness Untreated clinical depression in pregnancy has several known risks. As noted above, babies born to mothers with clinical depression have a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight. They are also more likely to require neonatal intensive care and are at greater risk of behavioral problems and impaired cognition in childhood. Women who are clinically depressed have an increased risk of developing preeclampsia – a condition involving high blood pressure that, if not identified and treated quickly, can be fatal to both mother and fetus. Just as concerning is the heightened risk of suicide in depression. Suicide accounts for about 8% of deaths in pregnancy and shortly after birth. Compared with these very serious risks, the risks of using SSRIs in pregnancy turn out to be minimal. While women used to be encouraged to stop taking SSRIs during pregnancy to avoid some of these risks, this is no longer recommended, as it exposes women to a high chance of depression relapse. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends that all perinatal mental health treatments, including SSRIs, continue to be available. Many women are already reluctant to take antidepressants during pregnancy, and given the choice, they tend to avoid it. From a psychological standpoint, exposing their fetus to the side effects of antidepressant medications is one of many common reasons for women in the U.S. to feel maternal guilt or shame. However, the available data suggests such guilt is not warranted. Taken together, the best thing one can do for pregnant women and their babies is not to avoid prescribing these drugs when needed, but to take every measure possible to promote health: optimal prenatal care, and the combination of medications with psychotherapy, as well as other evidence-based treatments such as bright light therapy, exercise and adequate nutrition. The panel failed to address the latest neuroscience behind depression, how antidepressants work in the brain and the biological rationale for why doctors use them in the first place. Patients deserve education on what's happening in their brain, and how a drug like an SSRI might work to help. Depression during pregnancy and in the months following birth is a serious barrier to brain health for mothers. SSRIs are one way of promoting healthy brain changes so that mothers can thrive both short- and long-term. Should the FDA, as a result of this recent panel, decide to place a black-box warning on antidepressants in pregnancy, researchers like us already know from history what will happen. In 2004, the FDA placed a warning on antidepressants describing potential suicidal ideation and behavior in young people. In the following years, antidepressant-prescribing decreased, while the consequences of mental illness increased. And it's easy to imagine a similar pattern in pregnant women. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Nicole Amoyal Pensak, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and Andrew Novick, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus Read more: Risk of death related to pregnancy and childbirth more than doubled between 1999 and 2019 in the US, new study finds US preterm birth and maternal mortality rates are alarmingly high, outpacing those in all other high-income countries Study shows an abortion ban may lead to a 21% increase in pregnancy-related deaths I receive royalties for the sales of my book RATTLED, How to Calm New Mom Anxiety with the Power of the Postpartum Brain. Dr Novick has a career development award from the National Institute of Child Health and Development (K23HD110435) to study the neurobiology of hormonal contraception. This funding was not used to support the preparation or publication of this article. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent those of the National Institutes of Health or the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store