The true toll of wildfire smoke

Summary

---

Front Burner (CBC) – "The true toll of wildfire smoke"

Episode aired: July 17, 2026

Host: Jayme Poisson
Guest: David Wallace-Wells, climate journalist and author of The Uninhabitable Earth

---

Episode Theme Overview

This episode explores the escalating impact of wildfire smoke as an inescapable part of life in Canada and around the globe. Host Jayme Poisson speaks with climate expert David Wallace-Wells about the health toll of wildfire smoke, the differences between urban and rural exposures, the global sources of air pollution, and the challenge of mounting a response at both local and international scales in the face of political and environmental complexities.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Wildfire Smoke Becomes a Shared Crisis

• Toronto's recent experience: Even city dwellers, far from immediate fire zones, are being affected—Toronto recently experienced the worst air quality in the world due to distant wildfires. (01:12)
  • "Toronto briefly had the worst air quality in the entire world this week, which led to government warnings to limit time outside, canceled World Cup screenings, and shutdowns of public pools." — Jayme Poisson
• Growing national crisis: Wildfires now affect not only rural and remote communities but urban centers and even regions thousands of kilometers from the original fires. David Wallace-Wells emphasizes the unnerving scale and reach of these events. ([02:22], [04:22])

2. Health Effects: Immediate versus Long-Term ([02:47]–[04:12])

• Acute effects: Spikes in hospital admissions, increases in asthma and respiratory issues occur locally when smoke is thickest.
• Long-term concerns: The greater toll is seen over months/years, with elevated cancer rates in firefighters and increased chronic respiratory illnesses in communities affected by recurring smoke.
  • "The most significant effects are still relatively long term as opposed to acute... the largest toll is health impacts [that] last for months and years." — David Wallace-Wells ([02:47])

3. The Reach and Unpredictability of Smoke ([05:16])

• Distance and altitude matter: Smoke’s effects can fluctuate due to how high it is in the atmosphere and local weather patterns.
  • "There's a strange way in which our perception may not be the best indicator of how safe it is to breathe the air." — David Wallace-Wells ([05:16])
• Smoke crosses borders: Not just a Canadian issue; US cities like Detroit, Chicago, and New York also recently hit hazardous levels. Previously, smoke has crossed oceans, reaching Europe and South America from distant continents.

4. Comparing Wildfire Smoke to Other Air Pollution ([07:29])

• What’s burning changes the danger: Woodlands produce different toxins than burning built environments—urban fires mean people may inhale melted appliances, plastics, and toxic chemicals.
  • "We're talking about breathing in the residue of bicycles and refrigerators and cars and insulation and vinyl siding." — David Wallace-Wells ([07:45])
• Severity: On a per-dose basis, wildfire smoke is often worse for health than typical urban air pollution.
• Stark projections: US deaths from wildfire smoke could rise to 70,000 per year by the latter part of the century. ([07:45])

5. Practical Advice for Individuals ([10:54])

• Staying indoors and masking up: Using N95 masks and air purifiers is helpful, but a few breaths outdoors aren’t catastrophic for most healthy people.
  • "The less of the smoke that you can breathe in, the better off you are....To the extent that you can stay indoors, that's better. To the extent that you can use air purifiers inside, that's good as well. And to the extent that you can wear a mask, that's helpful." — David Wallace-Wells ([11:13])

6. Global Sources of Air Pollution ([14:29])

• Fossil fuels are the biggest culprit globally, but burning wood, crop residue, and even cooking with biomass fuels has a huge regional impact, especially in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.
  • "The same thing that is cooking our planet is also torching our lungs." — David Wallace-Wells ([14:45])

7. The AI/Data Center Question ([15:45])

• Expansion concerns: AI data centers may soon add as much annual carbon as millions of new cars, but the biggest impacts depend on what powers them—coal, gas, or clean energy.
  • "If we were to devise ways to use clean power, it would have no effect. And to the extent that we're using natural gas, it will have a medium effect. And to the extent that we're using coal, it will have a significant effect." — David Wallace-Wells ([16:20])
• Locally, data center emissions can worsen air quality, but they're secondary on the global scale compared to fossil fuel emissions and wildfire smoke spikes.

8. Examples of Successful Pollution Control ([18:11])

• China’s ‘war on pollution’: Moving coal plants away from cities, installing filtration, and massive renewables investment led to a 40% drop in particulate pollution by 2023.
  • "They moved all their coal plants just farther away from Beijing, so they didn’t close them all… The combined capacity of wind and solar in China surpassed coal in almost every part of this country." — David Wallace-Wells & Narrator ([18:33],[19:07])
• Political dimension: China, an authoritarian state, moved faster on air quality than democracies sometimes do—a “paradox” given health urgency.
  • "It’s interesting that an authoritarian government that is not democratically responsive to its population may have moved faster to alleviate the health burden of pollution than we’ve seen in any democratic country in the world." — David Wallace-Wells ([19:53])

9. Political Hurdles and Backsliding ([20:59])

• US regulatory rollbacks: Trump administration reversed important environmental protections, risking higher public health costs even if pollution doesn’t return to pre-regulation peaks.
  • "Maybe the most visible crime against humanity that they've imposed on their population is this across the board effort to weaken oversight and regulation of environmental contamination." — David Wallace-Wells ([21:25])

10. Tackling the Root Cause: Can We Stop the Fires? ([23:03])

• Human limits: Fire suppression, prescribed burns, and Indigenous practices help, but much of Canada's fire burn is now happening in remote, previously untouched areas.
• Unintended consequences: Even efforts to manage fire through prescribed burns have sparked catastrophic blazes; political resistance (not-in-my-backyard) also stalls solutions.
  • "What we've seen over the last few years has really given me pause...This is not the result of human action, which means it's hard to understand how human action could limit it in the future." — David Wallace-Wells ([23:03])
• Systemic, global issue: Wildfires are a climate-driven challenge requiring coordinated, large-scale responses.

11. Linking Climate Action and Smoke ([25:21])

• Public frustration: As wildfires worsen, anger grows at perceived lack of commitment to climate goals, yet political and economic priorities are shifting in many countries.
• Shared responsibility: The ability of any single nation to mitigate these impacts is limited; blaming other countries (e.g., US politicians accusing Canada) is a political evasion.
  • "The forces that are producing that risk are global. And the US is a major... we're the number two contributor." — David Wallace-Wells ([28:38])

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the haunting return of wildfires:
  "We're talking about breathing in the residue of bicycles and refrigerators and cars and insulation and vinyl siding."
  — David Wallace-Wells ([07:45])

• On individual action:
  "A few breaths of air between your front door and your car or whatever are not going to be all that bad for most people."
  — David Wallace-Wells ([11:13])

• On the challenge of stopping wildfires:
  "The whole problem seems much harder than I thought it was just a few years ago."
  — David Wallace-Wells ([23:03])

• On political rhetoric and blame:
  "We have this instinct in the moment of disaster to try to pin the blame on somebody because we don't want to acknowledge that the system as a whole has gone completely haywire and is subjecting us to risks that we never thought we would have to tolerate."
  — David Wallace-Wells ([28:38])

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:46 — Jayme sets the scene: Toronto’s apocalyptic sky and nationwide evacuations
• 02:47 — Health effects near fires and how community health is affected for years
• 05:16 — How distance and atmospheric conditions change smoke impact
• 07:45 — Wildfire smoke vs. other air pollution; severity; projections
• 11:13 — Individual precautions: masks, staying indoors
• 14:45 — Global air pollution sources, with focus on fossil fuels
• 16:20 — Data center energy use and local/global air quality impacts
• 18:33 — How China rapidly cleaned up urban air
• 19:53 — Political paradox: China’s authoritarian approach vs. democracies
• 21:25 — US reversals on environmental regulations
• 23:03 — Why wildfires are so hard to manage—even with ‘good’ policies
• 25:47 — Political will, a need for global cooperation, and the temptation to blame

---

Tone & Style

The conversation is urgent, blunt, evidence-based but avoids alarmism—balancing the gravity of the problem with actionable advice and global perspective. Wallace-Wells is candid about the complexity and scale, while Jayme Poisson grounds the conversation in relatable, current examples.

---

Summary Takeaway

Wildfire smoke is now an annual reality for millions, reshaping how we think about air quality—and the very idea of 'distance' from environmental disaster. The issue ties local experiences to global systems: climate change, pollution, political will, and the limits of individual action. The only effective path forward, the episode suggests, will be collective—requiring deep global, not merely national, action to mitigate both underlying drivers and acute aftermaths of these fires.

Transcript

[Monday.com AI Agent Advertiser]

Monday, AI agents took over my work

[David Wallace-Wells]

and I absolutely love it.

[Monday.com AI Agent Advertiser]

Chasing deadlines, writing status reports, updating stakeholders. Agents handle the daily grind. Now they live inside Monday.com, so they see the full my work, my team, the whole company. And I don't have to worry about the data. It's safe, which means I'm free to focus on the big stuff. Knowing everything runs smoothly in the background. It's completely shifted the way we work. Create your own AI agent in minutes on Monday dot com. This is a CBC podcast.

[David Wallace-Wells]

This has gotten a little scary.

[Unidentified Commentator]

Yeah.

[Jamie Poisson]

Hey, everybody, it's Jamie. When I woke up in Toronto on Wednesday, it looked like I was living on a different planet. The sky was orange, the air was hazy and smelled like a campfire on social media. Video was circulating of a train stopped on the tracks in northern Ontario surrounded by flames. Like it was, frankly driving through hell.

[David Wallace-Wells]

Okay, y' all need to hurry up here. Like, seriously, we're encased in flames now.

[Jamie Poisson]

Not far from that scene, wildfires caused mass destruction to homes and community infrastructure in Collins. First Nation and thousands of people have been evacuated from their communities in the region. As the planet heats up, wildfire seasons are getting worse, and even those of us living in cities safe from the flames are feeling the effects. Toronto briefly had the worst air quality in the entire world this week, which led to government warnings to limit time outside, canceled World cup screenings, and shutdowns of public pools. And it's more than a nuisance. The Canadian Climate Institute estimates that wildfire smoke is associated with about 2,500 premature deaths per year across the country. So today we're going to talk about what it means that wildfire smoke is becoming a more regular part of our lives and its place in the larger battle for clean air around the world. David Wallace Wells is a climate journalist and author of the Uninhabitable Earth. David, it is really great to have you back on the show. Thank you so much for making the time.

[David Wallace-Wells]

My pleasure. Thanks for having me.

[Jamie Poisson]

So Toronto, as I mentioned, briefly had the worst air quality in the world earlier this week. But I'm about four and a half hours away from the closest fire. The next closest big one is in Quebec and is like an eight hour drive. And I wonder if we can start with what it's like when you are right up close, putting aside the actual flames. Talk to me a bit about the smoke impact closest to the actual fires,

[David Wallace-Wells]

which, well, it can be incredibly oppressive. It can make it incredibly hard to, you know, move around outside comfortably. But the most Significant effects are still relatively long term as opposed to acute. You do see, you know, big spikes in hospital admissions right around the arrival of a big fire and smoke effects. But when you look at the way that cancer rates increase among wildfire fighters and, and the way that communities that were dealing with a big burst of wildfire smoke have their health affected not just for days and weeks, but for months and years, I think those are ultimately the most concerning, largest toll health impacts. The immediate experience I think is typically dominated less by the smoke and the difficulty breathing and much more by the sheer terror of flames. Like some of the scenes that you're describing in which we are now seeing unfortunately more and more often. I'm, I'm an American, I think these days most often about the Los Angeles fires from last January. But these are events that are happening not just more and more frequently. They're not just burning more and more land, not just tearing up more and more landscape and turning it into smoke that we breathe, but also burning through relatively densely populated communities and producing some quite tragic, horrifying results.

[Monday.com AI Agent Advertiser]

Not far away Monday, residents in Nami Gooses First Nation were forced out, some by boat. The community home to about 130 people destroyed.

[David Wallace-Wells]

Growing wildfires in Manitoba have prompted evacuations.

[News Reporter]

The firefight is underway in the Northwest Territories. A massive blaze continues to threaten the village of Fort Simpson. Another is threatening the community of Wrigley. The fire burning in British Columbia's Fraser Canyon has led to the evacuation of three communities while a fourth is on alert. More than 800 fires are burning across the country. The vast majority are out of control.

[Jamie Poisson]

It's devastating to watch as it is every summer now, as I mentioned in Toronto, I can see the haze and smell the smoke across Ontario.

[News Reporter]

Orange tinted skies, the smoke from wildfires burning in the province's northwest prompting Environment Canada to issue a severe air quality warning. The smoke also drifting across the US border.

[Jamie Poisson]

How does the impact of the smoke change as the distance increases?

[David Wallace-Wells]

The distance itself is one factor. There's also the relative height. So at certain times in certain places, wildfire smoke traveling hundreds of miles can be relatively high in the sky. It can produce really eerie cinematic effects without even necessarily impacting much the health of the people on the ground. And then in other places it can descend much lower and become something that we all breathe in. And so there's also, there's a strange way in which our perception may not be the best indicator of how safe it is to breathe the air. And in fact a lot of the technical measures that we might check on our phone for air quality. Those are also at best incomplete. And so, you know, among the other things that makes this a sort of worrying, anxiety producing experience is that it's very hard to come by reliable information about how serious the threat is to one's health. In general, the closer you are to a fire, the more vulnerable you are to the effects of smoke. But the smoke can be carried quite a long ways. You mentioned the air quality in Toronto, but today, some of the worst places in the world are in Detroit, in Chicago yesterday, New York, where I am, registered quite worrying levels. And we've seen from previous wildfire seasons that smoke can travel across the Atlantic Ocean, from even the west coast of Canada across the Atlantic Ocean all the way to Europe. We've seen Australian bushfires travel not just to New Zealand, but all the way across the much larger Pacific Ocean to Latin America, South America. And so depending on the wind patterns, you can be literally halfway around the world and still suffering as a result of great fires that are far, far away. And that is, I think, one additional thing that most of us living in cities like Toronto and New York haven't really yet reckoned with. The idea that we may not come face to face with fires ourselves, but fires that are hundreds or even thousands of miles away can be imposing really serious consequences for ourselves and those we love.

[Jamie Poisson]

I know you said it's hard to kind of gauge how dangerous it could be, but I mean, just tell me more about what we, we know about how dangerous this wildfire smoke, smoke that spreads, could potentially be. Is it more harmful than other pollution? Less, for example?

[David Wallace-Wells]

Well, you know, a lot depends on what's actually burning. And one of the kind of confusions at the moment about the way we talk about these fires, that we group a lot of things together. So, you know, a couple years ago in the 2023 fire season, I was up in Yellowknife looking at what had happened with the Northwest Territories there. That fire, it's basically all trees that are burning. I mean, there are some communities that suffered and were damaged as a result. But in terms of the mass of fuel that was being turned into smoke, it was almost entirely wood and tree. When you think about what happened in Los Angeles last January, something very different. Some people have called it the return of the urban firestorm. What we're seeing there is that is not a fire that's in the wildland breaching into some small community. It's a fire that really takes the community, the built environment, as the fuel and as A result turns all of that built material into what we're breathing. So when we talk about what happened in, in the Palisades or in Altadena, we're not even really talking about brush fire or trees being burned and then being breathed. We're talking about breathing in the residue of bicycles and refrigerators and cars and insulation and vinyl siding. There is some wildlife in there, but there's also an enormous amount of quite corrosive toxic stuff that we're breathing in. And so a lot depends on what actually goes into the fire to determine how unhealthy it is, you know, coming out the other side. In general, it's believed that wildfire smoke on a sort of per dose basis is worse for you than most conventional air pollution. Pollution, I should say at the global level is an incredible killer. We're talking about 5 to 10 million people a year dying from the exposure to air pollution in certain parts of the world. You see across the Gangetic plain in India, people having their life expectancy cut by five years or more from these effects. In places like Canada, the US and Europe, we're on more of a recognizable downslope. We're exposed to less industrial air pollution than we were in a previous generation. But we're starting to see those gains which we had kind of banked emotionally come undone because of the effects of wildfire. And the effects on health are really quite notable. You mentioned one estimate of the Canadian death toll estimated in a couple thousands. The other estimates are considerably higher. In the US some estimates suggest something like 20,000 people dying every year from the effects of wildfire. Some are higher than that. And then if you project into the decades ahead, sort of best in class gold standard science suggests that we will be seeing something like in the US 70,000 deaths a year in the second half of the century because of exposure to wildfire and smoke. So it's a quite significant public health threat. Thankfully, in most cases it's relatively time limited, which means we can take certain kinds of precautions, knowing that in a few days we can undo those. But in other parts of the country and in the world, the kinds of risks that used to impose themselves for just a few days are now imposing themselves for weeks or months. And that becomes considerably harder to shoulder that burden.

[Jamie Poisson]

Right. To stay indoors.

[David Wallace-Wells]

Wear a mask.

[Jamie Poisson]

Yeah, well, the mask thing, I have been seeing people walking and riding around wearing those N95 masks that we held during COVID which was, you know, not a great flashback to be honest. But does that help? Does that make a difference Yeah, I

[David Wallace-Wells]

think the basic rule of thumb is the intuitive one, the less of the smoke that you can breathe in, the better off you are. And I should say that in general, you know, I think we have a intuition about some of these risks because they're, they appear so apocalyptic. We think of this as, as poison and in a certain way it is. There is poison being carried by the air into our lungs, but there's a lot of stuff we breathe every day that's quite bad. People in cities like Toronto and New York used to breathe quite poor air quite a lot in the 60s and 70s when we had a lot more industrial pollution. And so it's, we shouldn't think of this risk as like when we walk outside, we take one gul of Aram, we're going to have a dramatic health event as a result. It's more of the, you know, the kind of thing that you imagine being notable at the population level where you see some significant number of additional asthma cases reporting to emergency rooms and people with respiratory conditions suffering more. And those are real public health costs, I don't want to minimize them. But it is the kind of thing that happens at the population level much more than it seems to affect you acutely and at the individual level you should, I think, relate to the threat in the same way, which is to take precautions that limit the amount that's going into your lungs without straining to prevent every single ounce of smoke particle from getting in there. Because few breaths of air between your front door and your car or whatever are not going to be all that bad for most people. But that means that if to the extent you can stay indoors, that's better. To the extent that you can use air purifiers inside, that's good as well. And to the extent that you can wear a mask, that's helpful.

[Zocdoc Advertiser]

This episode is sponsored by zocdoc. Have you been putting off a doctor's appointment or need a dentist and you don't know where to start? We've definitely been there and that's why we use Zoc do actually over the holidays Michael had a dental emergency in seemingly every office was closed, but we hopped onto ZOC dock, found an in network dentist, had great reviews, saw real time appointments available, which was key. It was on New Year's Day and booked an appointment in just minutes. It took so much of the stress out of the already stressful situation. ZOCDOC makes it easy to search and compare over 250,000 local in network providers across more than 200 specialties so you can find the right doctor or dentist and book instantly. Taking care of your health just got easier. Download the ZocDoc app today and book that appointment on your to do list. That's Z o C d o c Zocdoc.

[David Ridgeon]

Jacqueline Furlan Smith, a 40 year old former Canadian military trainer moves to Costa Rica to follow her dreams. But in the summer of 2021, vanishes without a trace.

[News Reporter]

How can a woman just go missing and us put out all that effort to find her and she's still missing.

[David Ridgeon]

I'm David Ridgeon and this is Someone knows something Season 10 the Jacqueline Furlan Smith Case.

[Monday.com AI Agent Advertiser]

Listen ad free on Amazon Music.

[Jamie Poisson]

I wonder if we could zoom out a bit more now to talk about air pollution globally more generally. And just if you could tell me more about what the biggest sources of air pollution globally are right now. Is it energy? Is it farming?

[David Wallace-Wells]

Yeah, it's a little misleading to talk in the global scale because different countries have different mixes. And so in different parts of the world, the causes are really distinct and the solution set if we want to take action are also different. But generally speaking, globally, the biggest source is the burning of fossil fuels. You know, the same thing that is cooking our planet is also torching our lungs. In the parts of the world where air pollution is worst, notably South Asia and to some extent sub Saharan Africa. Parts of sub Saharan Africa, the effects of agricultural burning and in fact biomass burning inside the home, which is to say cooking with unclean fuels, are really significant contributors to the mortality burden overall. But if we're taking stock of the global picture, um, it's sort of the same story as global warming. The same thing that's causing, that is causing this.

[Jamie Poisson]

We're seeing this huge push right now for data centers.

[Local Resident near AI Data Center]

This Alberta county, less than an hour outside Edmonton, soon to be home to a massive AI data center. But in towns near the future site, residents have mixed feelings.

[David Wallace-Wells]

I just don't know about the, the impact.

[Jamie Poisson]

A study from Cornell found that AI growth could put an additional 24 to 44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by 2030 in the US alone, which is the equivalent of adding 5 to 10 million cars on the roads. And just put that into perspective for me. What could this data center push mean for air quality?

[David Wallace-Wells]

Well, a huge amount depends on what we use to produce the power for those data centers. And that is still being determined and shaking out. You know, if we were to devise ways to use clean power, it would have no effect. And to the extent that we're using natural gas, it will have a medium effect. And to the extent that we're using coal, it will have a significant effect. And so all of that is up in the air. And there are people working and trying to design policies to make sure that data centers are as clean as they can be, as opposed to as dirty as they can be. I would also say, you know, the numbers that you cited are striking when considered from a baseline of zero. But if we're talking about the equivalent of adding 5 million cars to the road, the US has hundreds of millions of cars on the road already. So the data center story is a significant one. It's producing a huge political backlash in the US There are environmental concerns, but there are also political concerns, there are economic concerns, existential concerns, all of those into the backlash. And so it's a bit of a complicated picture. I would say that locally, if you have a data center, especially one that's like running on coal power, but is maybe even if they've built a new natural gas facility to power them, you may be dealing with some significant additional air pollution in that area. And that may be one real reason to sort of to fight that project. But at the national level or the global level, I think the data center story is a secondary one. And we're still talking about in bulk fossil fuel problems and this sort of more erratic but quite concerning spike in wildfire smoke and emissions.

[Jamie Poisson]

You know, I want to ask you about efforts to curb air pollution. The Chinese government declared a war against air pollution in 2014, right after this very smoggy winter. And that was followed by actually steep drop in particulate pollution. It fell around 40% by 2023. And just how, how did they do that?

[David Wallace-Wells]

They did a few different things. One big thing is they moved all their coal plants just farther away from Beijing, so they didn't close them all. They are in some way moving towards a post coal electricity system, although not all that rapidly. But in the meantime, they just moved the production away from people to make the exposure considerably less. They took some measure to and some initiatives to filter the air that was coming out of the, out of those plants. And they also have begun to roll out green electricity in a much more dramatic way.

[Narrator]

China's economic miracle was fueled by one thing, coal. But in 2025, a critical threshold was crossed. For the first time, the combined capacity of wind and solar in China surpassed coal in almost every part of this country. Building a new wind or solar farm is now cheaper than running a coal plant.

[David Wallace-Wells]

They've also done Some amount of kind of geoengineering to try to prevent what pollution there is from approaching population centers. But I think the main thing is just moving the coal plants farther away, fitting them with, you know, with some kind of air filters, and trying to green the electricity system generally, rather than plunging headlong into the coal future.

[Jamie Poisson]

Yeah. Do you see China as a kind of model or.

[David Wallace-Wells]

There are a lot of different models, but yes. I mean, in general, I think, you know, I think it's interesting that an authoritarian government that is not democratically responsive to its population may have moved faster to alleviate the health burden of pollution than we've seen in any democratic country in the world. That's maybe an irony, maybe it's a paradox. It used to be that the American cleanup of our air in the 60s and 70s was cited as the gold standard, and it's still quite impressive. I think the benefits of the Clean Air act have been calculated in the tens of trillions of dollars and 30 to 50 times more benefits than the cost of undertaking that program. But we still have more progress to make. And as I was saying a few minutes ago, the wildfire effects are erasing many of those gains. Which means, you know, it's not just that we shouldn't be sitting pretty and patting ourselves on the back for where we are and then maybe thinking of doing a little bit better. We actually have to take proactive action to prevent things from getting worse from where they are.

[Jamie Poisson]

We're also watching this push, though, from the Trump administration to reverse a lot of environmental regulations. I just. Where. Where do you see the US Right now when it comes to clean air?

[David Wallace-Wells]

Well, I think that the Trump administration has been an unmistakable villain when it comes to climate.

[Unidentified Commentator]

It's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion. Climate change, no matter what happens, you're

[David Wallace-Wells]

involved in that when it comes to health, when it comes to science. But maybe the most visible crime against humanity that they've imposed on their population is this across the board effort to weaken oversight and regulation of environmental contamination. Whether it's mercury in the air or, you know, carcinogenic pesticides sprayed on food. They are at every point doing what they can to weaken protections for American citizens and enable corporations to do more damage that they previously were unable to do. Ultimately, that is taking place in a policy context. There's also an economic context context, and it is not the case that, you know, Trump's rollbacks of these protections have already imposed 1960s level pollution on America. I don't think that would happen even if these rollbacks were permanent and lasted for decades, just because the public wouldn't tolerate it. But unfortunately, I think we're likely to see considerably more health consequences from some of these actions in the years ahead as the effects accumulate.

[Jamie Poisson]

I want to come back squarely to this issue of wildfires. I mean, if you're trying to address just that issue alone, the fires and then the smoke that comes from them, what is the answer there?

[David Wallace-Wells]

So I don't want to sound too fatalistic, but I've been on a bit of a journey myself on this question over the last few years, and the whole problem seems much harder than I thought it was just a few years ago. And what I mean by that is you get smoke from fires when fires burn. So the main way that you can control the distribution of smoke, the production of smoke, is by taking control of this fire problem. And a few years ago, I was persuaded by a lot of fire scientists who said that, especially in the U.S. but to some degree in Canada as well, we had made this problem for ourselves by fighting fire so aggressively over many decades that there was now this huge buildup of landscape, of fuel on the landscape, and that we could address that to some extent through smart logging practices, through some extent through prescribed burns, indigenous burning practices, and that that would allow us to really limit the ultimate fire risk on the landscape. And that seemed persuasive to me. But what we've seen over the last few years has really given me pause. And by that I mean, for instance, the 2023 fires in Canada burned mostly in areas that had never had any firefighting in them in the remote boreal forest. This is not the result of human action, which means it's hard to understand how human action could limit it in the future. They are largely uninhabited areas, which means it is extremely hard to fight them, even if we wanted to. And again, we have these scientists telling us, in some cases, we don't want to fight those fires because we want the forests to regenerate through fire, as they should. Naturally, in America, we've seen prescribed burning that actually got out of control. You know, fires that were set on days that we thought were safe, the fire actually escapes containment and turns into, you know, some of the biggest, largest fires in state history. There's also been all of this political opposition. People don't like fires in their neighborhood, even if they're told that they're safe. And so the challenge of getting us up to the scale that we would need to of prescribed burning to make bring the Landscape back into a kind of an equilibrium that seems really intimidatingly hard.

[Jamie Poisson]

Yeah, I mean, I guess the thing I have been seeing online in the last couple of days is an anger about, you know, a lack of commitment to climate goals. Right. And I just wonder if you could address that, like that connection that people are making between climate action and what they're experiencing.

[David Wallace-Wells]

Yeah, I mean, I think we're seeing it sort of across the board. There has been a notable decline in apparent climate concern. I think the surveys sort of tell a somewhat different story. But if you look at the headlines, you look at television news, climate change is just not the top shelf issue that it was just a few years ago. Few politicians are talking about it in existential terms like they were four or five years ago, including Mark Carney, who was a brave climate leader for a long period in his life and has made promotion of the extraction of fossil fuels one of the central projects of his time in office.

[Mark Carney]

Now the goal remains the same, but as times have changed, we must change our plan to get there. We can't afford to restrain the growth of an important part of our energy mix, oil and gas, to meet a short term goal. I want to be clear on this point. The changes we have made will mean that our emissions will be higher in the next few years than they were projected to be under the previous government's plan. But in my judgment, that plan was not sustainable over the long term.

[David Wallace-Wells]

But that isn't exceptional or unusual. You're seeing that kind of backsliding among many leaders all around the world. The wildfire problem, like many climate impacts, is a complicated one to detail or describe in terms of climate action, because the United States, whatever it does, is probably going to have a much bigger impact on Canada's climate than Canada will. Certainly Canada's climate action is going to be small compared to the effect of the entire rest of the world on Canada's climate. And that means that the levers are relatively weak for any individual country trying to take control of any individual impact. But that's one reason why we need to do all this together rather than thinking in narrowly nationalistic terms. I think it's one of the big costs of the political changes that we've seen around the world over the last five or six years, or maybe you could say 10 or 12 years, in which more people are thinking in individual aided nationalistic terms, not thinking about the global community. And you see, you know, I've seen in my social media over the last few days a lot of Americans yelling

[Jamie Poisson]

at Canada A group of Republican congressmen just wrote Mark Carney saying basically, like, get your act together. Yeah.

[David Wallace-Wells]

And that. We saw that in 2023, too, when this happened. I mean, I think there's. There's actually the media is a little bit at fault where, like, people are so aggressively calling these Canadian wildfires. Dangerous smoke from Canadian wildfires. Dangerous smoke from Canadian wildfires. Dangerous smoke from raging Canadian wildfires.

[Unidentified Commentator]

Canadian wildfire smoke invading the nation right now.

[Narrator]

Let's go.

[David Wallace-Wells]

I keep saying to my friends, like, there's a lot of fire in Minnesota, too, that's happening right now, not to mention fires all around the US and it's a complete political evasion. It's irresponsible, and it's intellectually disingenuous. Mark Carney is not responsible for the fires burning in Canada. Canada's firefighting forces are not responsible for the fires now burning in Canada. The forces that are producing that risk are global. And the US Is a major. You know, we're the number two contributor. So, you know, we have this instinct in the moment of disaster to try to pin the blame on somebody because we don't want to acknowledge that the system as a whole has gone completely haywire and is subjecting us to risks that we never thought we would have to tolerate.

[Jamie Poisson]

David, thank you so much for this. Really appreciate it.

[David Wallace-Wells]

My pleasure. Thanks for your time and talk to you guys soon.

[Jamie Poisson]

All right, that is all for today. Front Burner was produced this week by Joytha Shangupta, Matthew Amha, Kevin Sexton, Sam McNulty, Dave Modi, and MacKenzie Cameron. Our YouTube producer is John Lee. Our music is by Joseph Shabazin. Our senior producers are Elaine Chao and Imogen Burchard. Our executive producer is Nick McCabe Blocos. And I'm Jamie Poisson. We'll be back next week. Thanks so much for listening.

[Monday.com AI Agent Advertiser]

For more cbc podcasts, go to cbc ca podcasts.