• Stock photo of a forest fire. (Pixabay)Source: Pixabay
Even though fires are a natural feature of boreal forests, changing ecology can mean a worrying contribution to climate change.
Stefan H. Doerr

The Conversation
27 Jul 2016 - 11:16 AM  UPDATED 27 Jul 2016 - 11:16 AM

You’ve probably seen dramatic images of out of control wildfires that directly and immediately affect people. The news recently followed 200 firefighters tackling a blaze in California, while this May many watched the evacuation of more than 50,000 people from Fort McMurray in Canada. 

But, every so often, in regions too remote for the TV cameras, satellite images reveal vast fires covering thousands of square kilometres in smoke. This is what’s happening in Siberia, right now.

This all leaves an impression of large-scale destruction and ecological disaster. But are we really right to be worried? 

Although – wrongly – perceived as avoidable disasters, wildfires have been a natural and fundamental part of many of the world’s forests, grasslands and shrublands for millions of years. Fire is part of a natural rejuvenation cycle in these ecosystems. Attempts to eliminate it can have negative ecological impacts such as loss of biodiversity or increased vulnerability of forests to disease, and simply increase the risk of larger, more catastrophic fires.

Although necessary for many ecosystems, wildfires do release vast amounts of carbon into the atmosphere, currently 1.6–2.8 gigatonnes a year, equivalent to a third of the total amount emitted from the burning of fossil fuels. The CO2 emissions from fires help accelerate global warming, which in turn leads to more fire, while soot emitted from fires is often deposited on ice leading to accelerated melting

Canada’s huge wildfires may release carbon locked in permafrost
Fires like the one sweeping through Alberta could speed climate change, perhaps increasing future fire risks.

But that’s only part of the story. While burning vegetation inevitably releases carbon, this carbon is normally taken up again when the forest regrows. And charcoal formed during burning means carbon is “locked up” in soils and sediments. So wildfires in regions adapted to fire can overall be considered “carbon neutral” or in some cases even lead to carbon sequestration in the longer-term.

This means naturally recurring wildfires aren’t necessarily a threat to ecosystems or the global climate. What is of wider concern, however, is when they occur in ecosystems that are not well adapted to fire such as tropical forest or peatlands, or where fires are changing in their extent, or in how severely they burn the landscape. While the average annual area burned globally has changed surprisingly little during the last few decades, there are worrying trends in some regions such as larger blazes and longer fire seasons in the western US as a result of land management and a warming climate. 

Considering all this, what about the current fires in Siberia? Are they really anything out of the ordinary – and what should we make of the concern raised by Greenpeace, that the Russian government’s official figures of area burnt are huge underestimations?

Satellite observations can help us answer these two questions. First, satellite data has long shown that Russian government statistics are substantial underestimations of actual fire activity. Second, the annual area burned in boreal Asia (predominantly Siberia) is particularly variable, compared to the world’s other main vegetation zones. On average around 5m hectares have burned every year between 2001 and 2012, but this covered a range of more than than 15m in 2003 to less than 3m in 2005. The area burned so far this year in Siberia is well within that range, but then we’ve only just reached midsummer – the season is not yet over.

Just like boreal Canada, temperatures in Siberia are increasing faster than in many other parts of the world and this trend is expected to continue. Rising temperatures lead to drier vegetation, to fuel the fires, and more lightning, which increases the risk of fire. A hotter climate also lengthens the season during which fires occur. These factors combined are expected to increase fire activity in this region.

What is particularly worrying here is some of the fires in Siberia and other boreal regions affect peatlands which are gradually thawing thanks to global warming. This has a knock-on effect on the climate. When they burn deep into the ground peatland fires can release carbon that has accumulated over millennia and turn these peatlands from being net carbon sinks to long-term carbon emitters. So irrespective of discrepancies in reporting of fires in Siberia and the fact that fires are a natural feature of boreal forests, we can expect more fires and more associated greenhouse gas emissions in boreal regions in a warming world. 

Read these next
Before fusion: a human history of fire
Tending fire is a trait only humans have - how has it influenced the history of humankind?
Fires are increasing in warming world, but a new model could help us predict them
New data analysis shows bushfires have increased by 40% in the past five years, writes CSIRO researcher Ritaban Dutta.
SBS Insight: Line of Fire
What don't we know about bushfires? Insight delves into one of the most terrifying feats of nature; one that has scarred the Australian landscape for centuries.
Fires in Tasmania's ancient forests are a warning for all of us
The catastrophic fires destroying unique Tasmanian forests are entirely consistent with climate change, writes ecologist David Bowman.
The Conversation


Stefan H. Doerr, Professor of Geography and Editor in Chief of the International Journal of Wildland Fire, Swansea University and Cristina Santin, Research Officer, Geography, Swansea University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.