Trees, trees, fires

Just saw this very sad story about the heatwave in Canada, Canada a very tree-rich and normally cold country. There are other countries, with not as many trees but where there were trees, like in Australia, in heatwaves, the trees start to burn and cause a lot of damage.

Yes, trees are good, but they are only good if they don’t catch fire.

Whilst we have this big tree-planting craze in Britain, we are also looking into the face of earth warming, heatwaves and potentially hither fire risk from earth warming.

But the more trees we plant, the more trees can also catch fire. Especially those trees in cities are potential fire traps if it comes to combustibility.

From California to Australia, bushfires are the great danger and many houses burn down in such natural disasters. We are staring the next heatwave into the face and greater danger from fires from trees is imminent.

I just wonder whether those who advocate planting more trees in towns have thought about the dangers.

Just the dangers from Grenfell are definitely there in high-rise buildings who have trees planted into each balcony, because if one of those trees catches fire and it is hot and dry, all the other trees around the building will also catch fire.

Really, people just don’t think.

Why is cladding seen to be so dangerous when trees, which in a dry state are like cinder are considered good? I apologise for using a Grenfell fire picture but I need to bring across the message how dangerous people’s unrealistic thinking is.

A wildfire has burned 90% of Lytton, British Columbia – the village that recorded Canada’s highest ever temperature of 49.6C (121.3F).Lytton’s mayor earlier ordered people to evacuate, saying flames had spread through the village in just 15 minutes. Source BBC

Those town planners who now want to increase the number of trees in London significantly because they think that temperatures stay the same do not take into consideration into what would happen if temperatures heat up.

Looking at the image, which I took from a post on Facebook it seems unlikely that any solution to this is easy. Modern approaches include reducing traffic, planting more trees.

That is a most simplified solution. Reducing traffic will also reduce the economic infrastructure, jobs and culture. More trees, will increase flammability of areas as in hot climates, trees catch fire really easy.

Whilst we now get a lot of people racing to plant more trees, flowers and everything green, hot weather will simply burn the lot.

The picture above shows that we in Britain are in a cool corridor but how long for? Those who want to make us believe that putting more beehives in our towns will solve the worldwide climate crises are selling a dream. We do need fertilising methods but we need those worldwide not just in our cities.

Carbon capture seems the most appropriate way forward and removing it on an industrial scale from our atmosphere alongside carbon emission reductions world wide by changing fuel types. Reducing traffic is not a solution that helps productivity.

Looking at ideas of Carbon removal, they all seem to be based on the idea that our temperatures allow for it, but they are likely to get hotter.

This was published in 2019 and is by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, published by Science Daily, doesn’t rely on trees or nature but is a technical solution, which can be applied in any weather. I think that is the best way forward.

“The technique, based on passing air through a stack of charged electrochemical plates, is described in a new paper in the journal Energy and Environmental Science, by MIT postdoc Sahag Voskian, who developed the work during his PhD, and T. Alan Hatton, the Ralph Landau Professor of Chemical Engineering.”

Comments are closed.

Blog Stats

  • 55,012 hits
%d bloggers like this: