Several major events last week combined to remind me of the importance of taking action to address the existential challenges of climate change. The passing of Jimmy Carter reminded me that he was sounding the alarm back in 1980, 35 years before the Paris climate accords. If we had heeded his warning, we would be much closer today to meeting the Paris goal to limit global warming.
Also last week, the catastrophic fires in Los Angeles broke out, destroying thousands of homes, leaving tens of thousands of people without permanent shelter and killing two dozen. The historic 100 mph Santa Ana winds that spread the flames were supercharged by climate change.
It is important that our Illinois representatives and senators work to protect the climate provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act. These measures are starting to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change. Bipartisan cooperation would be extremely helpful.
— Richard Swanson, Brookfield
Opposite of leadership
I have to admit that Donald Trump is really good at what he does best: making things up.
Right now, while fellow Americans in California are losing their lives and property to wildfires, Trump is occupying himself not by mourning the victims or promising to help residents recover but by fabricating a story to blame people he doesn’t like. He claims that Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose name he deliberately and childishly mispronounces, withheld water supplies via something he calls a “water restoration declaration.”
No such “declaration” exists. It’s a pure fabrication.
But it certainly gets the job done — the job, that is, of distracting the public from the reality that climate change is largely responsible for this and many other disasters. And Trump does this in the Trumpiest way possible: by blaming environmentalists or pitting them against each other. In this case, he claims that the governor’s nonexistent “declaration” was made to protect an endangered fish in Northern California, making water unavailable for firefighting in Southern California. This is in the same vein that Trump opposes offshore wind energy because he claims, falsely, that wind turbines are “driving whales crazy.” Zing! Take that, hippies!
Trump is correct about one thing. The California fires are connected to a shortfall of water — not water from the state, whose reservoirs were full, but water from the sky in the form of rain. Record heat and drought throughout 2024 dried out vegetation, and typical early winter rains didn’t come. These are conditions that scientists have been telling us for decades would result from the buildup of unabated fossil fuel emissions.
The resulting climate disruption does a lot more than just make any given day a little warmer. Its far-reaching consequences include sucking money from our economy. Insurance companies are fleeing California and other climate-vulnerable states, not because of politics, but because they can’t afford to insure property under the increasingly risky climatic conditions. In a recent report, Munich Re, the world’s biggest insurer, said that “climate change is showing its claws” as the excess heat buildup continues to grow.
California, like all states, needs policies to address today’s reality, including better land management practices. But Trump’s brand of name-calling and falsehood peddling does nothing but make our problems worse, especially given his intransigent denial of climate science. This is the opposite of leadership.
— Rick Knight, Brookfield
Greed is killing us
I’m an elderly senior citizen, yet I totally agree with Abhinav Anne regarding our vulnerability to climate disasters (“There are lessons to be learned in ashes of California’s fires,” Jan. 13). Age is not the main reason climate change was ignored. Greed is the main reason, and those who embraced greed likely took that route early in their adult years. In many cases, that path requires the approval of politicians who see that approval as a benefit to their political career. More greed!
I’ve recently moved to Florida from Illinois and have seen how climate change has brought about more frequent and stronger hurricanes, causing greater damage, flooding and loss of life. Why were homes ever built on the barrier islands? The word “barrier” warns of danger! Developers were able take possession of those islands and sell chunks of it to those who wanted to look out a massive window to embrace the beauty of the ocean. Government entities had to approve the original acquisition of those islands and to provide approval of selling parcels as home sites. It doesn’t take much imagination on how that all took place.
In California, those beautiful hills and valleys were a magnet for the wealthy to build their ostentatious mansions. Those of lesser stature were happy to live nearby in packed housing developments just to view those hills. It was a disaster in the making, and it all had to be approved by government entities. Yet more greed!
We supposedly learn by our mistakes, but will the correct measures be taken to prevent such disasters in the future? Or will greed still be the rule?
— Kenneth Olsen, Englewood, Florida
Climate change a reality
California’s wildfires have laid bare a fundamental flaw in the state’s climate policy. While state leaders have long acknowledged the threat posed by climate change, the policies they have enacted in response to it have focused almost exclusively on reducing emissions, from banning natural gas to mandating solar panels for new homes. Meanwhile, policy to combat the tangible threats posed by climate change (e.g., intensifying wildfires) has proved woefully lacking.
This disconnect has been illustrated quite vividly by the current fire season. The Los Angeles fires have destroyed thousands of structures, displaced tens of thousands of residents and claimed the lives of at least 24 people. The rising danger of such devastating fires has been understood for years, yet state leaders have consistently failed to prioritize wildfire prevention. Even the state’s limited proactive mitigation efforts have fallen short of expectations, while forward-thinking forest management efforts have been stymied by bureaucratic delays. Plans to treat 500,000 acres of forest annually, for example, have failed to materialize fully despite wide recognition of the need.
California’s climate policies, such as those of so many other state governments and the federal government, hinge on a sort of magical thinking that decarbonization alone can avert disaster by somehow stopping climate change in its tracks. But this ignores the reality that global emissions will continue to rise over the next few decades at least, driven by developing economies, regardless of what governments in the developed world do to curb emissions. Policymakers at all levels should be acting as if climate change is inevitable, because it is.
California may not be able to stop climate change, but it can prepare to live with the consequences of climate change. The key is to shift from a mentality of “if” to one of “when.”
I can only hope that California’s wildfires will be a wakeup call for policymakers nationwide.
— John C. Engle, Chicago
Editor’s note: We’d like to hear from you about your hopes for the new year — whether for our country, our state, your community or your family. Submit a letter of no more than 400 words to letters@chicagotribune.com. Be sure to include your full name and city/town.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.