While we are at it we should name some of these west coast fires after the politicians who have supported shutting down the forests to sensible resource management.
So the question is, how much of these wildfires are due to climate change, and how much is due to bad forest "resource management" (not sure what this entails - preventing more frequent smaller fires with firefighting which causes bigger fires years later?) and how much to some other reason (water table depletion, etc)?
https://www.sierraforestlegacy.org/Resources/Conservation/Fi...
> Approximately 1.8 million ha burned annually in California prehistorically (pre 1800). Our estimate of prehistoric annual area burned in California is 88% of the total annual wildfire area in the entire US during a decade (1994–2004) characterized as ‘‘extreme’’ regarding wildfires. The idea that US wildfire area of approximately two million ha annually is extreme is certainly a 20th or 21st century perspective. Skies were likely smoky much of the summer and fall in California during the prehistoric period.
See also: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.201...
> Many consider wildfire as an accelerating problem [...] however, important exceptions aside, the quantitative evidence available does not support these perceived overall trends.
Copernicus - https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu/global-forecast-plots
NASA GEOS - https://fluid.nccs.nasa.gov/cf/classic_geos_cf/
From those, I concluded that we could see fresh air in san francisco as early as this afternoon. Right now, that doesn't seem possible, so I'm wondering if there are other models that exist?
According to who? You?