climate crisis – mackaycartoons

Donald Trump: Dirtiest U.S. President Ever

February 14, 2025 by Graeme MacKay

Donald Trump: Dirtiest U.S. President Ever

Make Pollution Great Again

Friday February 14, 2025 | Newsletter 15

While everyone is suffering daily whiplash from the unpredictable actions of the attention-seeking U.S. President, who dictates what we should focus on, I chose this week to shine a light on his abysmal environmental record. Each day, I posted a past editorial cartoon featuring Donald Trump, highlighting his horrific efforts to turn back the clock on progress toward a better planet for future generations.

Throughout his first term, Donald Trump’s actions and policies consistently undermined efforts to protect the environment, setting a dangerous precedent for his potential return to the presidency. This week, we explored his abysmal record through a series of editorial cartoons from that period, illustrating his disregard for ecological integrity. The horrors unleashed during his first term foreshadow an even more troubling future, as there is no indication that his stewardship of the planet will improve.

Sunday: The Legacy of Plastic Pollution

“This is Your Life in Single Use Plastics” (April 24, 2018)

This cartoon highlights the long-lasting impact of plastic waste, showcasing how every piece of disposable plastic carries a story tied to human experiences. During his first term, Trump’s push to roll back environmental protections, including regulations on single-use plastics, exemplifies a neglect of sustainable practices. In one of his early executive orders of his second Presidency he triumphantly put to end perhaps the greatest among the most ridiculous first world problems: paper straws. It was met with roaring cheers within the planet’s greatest throw-away society. His prioritization of short-term political gains over environmental responsibility signals a troubling trend that jeopardizes future generations.

Monday: Make Coal Great Again

Trump: Polluter of the Skies (November 23, 2016)

In this cartoon, Trump is depicted as a giant figure overshadowing a polluted landscape, emphasizing his commitment to reviving the declining coal industry while Canada advanced in reducing carbon emissions. Throughout his first term, Trump rolled back critical environmental regulations to support fossil fuels. This focus on short-term economic interests, at the expense of climate change and public health, raises serious concerns about what awaits in his upcoming term.

Tuesday: Attacking the Great Lakes

Trump at the Great Lakes (March 8, 2017)

In this cartoon, Trump is shown dismantling the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, a critical program for protecting one of the world’s largest freshwater resources. His proposed budget cuts of up to 97% during his first term endangered restoration efforts vital for millions. This negligence toward clean water initiatives highlights a persistent trend of environmental degradation, suggesting that his future policies may continue to disregard essential ecological stewardship.

Wednesday: Withdrawing from Global Climate Agreements

“America First, Planet Last” (June 2, 2017)

This imagery illustrates Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement, depicting him as a direct threat to global climate efforts. His exit during his first term positioned the U.S. as an outlier, undermining international cooperation essential for combating climate change. The ramifications of this withdrawal continue to echo, and with Trump’s return to office, American multilateralism isn’t in the backseat as it was in Trump’s first term, it’s tied up and muzzled in the trunk. There is zero reason to believe he will prioritize global climate responsibility.

Thursday: Flaming Misinformation

Trump Surrounded by Wildfire and Misinformation (September 15, 2020)

In the midst of devastating wildfires during his first term, Trump dismissed climate change as a factor, attributing the crisis solely to mismanagement. This cartoon captures the chaos and denial surrounding his administration’s approach to environmental issues. By downplaying the role of climate change, Trump perpetuates misinformation that obstructs meaningful dialogue and action on pressing ecological challenges—a trend that’s already been on repeat in 2025 with the devastating fires in southern California and around Los Angeles.

Friday: America’s Conspiracy Theory President

Politicizing Natural Disasters (October 9, 2024)

This cartoon illustrates the absurdity of politicizing natural disasters, highlighting the dangerous rhetoric employed by Trump and others. As Hurricanes tore through Florida and into North Carolina in October 2024, the sight of politicians leveraging human suffering for their gain was a stark reminder of how far we have strayed from the ideals of public service. The portrayal suggests that as disasters arise, Trump may exploit them for political gain, rather than addressing the underlying environmental issues exacerbated by his policies. His actions to advance conspiracy theories reflect a broader pattern of misinformation and of neglect that not only impacts public trust in essential services but also threatens the planet’s future.

An unveiling… Drum Roll Please…

My hope is the editorial cartoons from this week highlight the environmental issues worsened by Donald Trump’s presidency. His focus on short-term economic gains continues to harm efforts to protect our planet. This has fuelled climate change skepticism, especially with support from figures like Canada’s Conservative leader, Pierre Poilievre, creating challenges for initiatives like the Liberal carbon pricing scheme. Although this scheme was designed to reduce emissions, it has faced pushback due to poor communication and relentless and simplistic political rhetoric.

Last year, to celebrate the 4th anniversary of my viral “waves” cartoon, I came up with two new wave concepts to follow the biodiversity collapse wave: a Zombie Apocalypse and an Alien Invasion. But then, along came Michael Solomon, director of London based Profit Through Ethics Ltd., who proposed a new idea for the fifth wave. With excitement, we unveil a new fifth wave for the fifth anniversary of the illustration.

Drumroll, please …Trump! A fitting representation of the political upheaval that threatens not just environmental protection but the planet in general. To the many skeptics out there, keep washing your hands, and all will be well….

Update: the above illustration is the focus of a March 11, 2025 post

The “Four Waves” cartoon illustrates the growing crises we face, culminating in this new wave of political turmoil. As we reflect on these issues, it’s vital to advocate for accountability and prioritize environmental care for future generations. With Trump currently in office, we need to stay alert to the threats posed to our environment. I hope this series serves as a reminder of the importance of being actively engaged in the fight for sustainable solutions for our planet.

Posted to Substack

Wednesday November 13, 2024

November 13, 2024 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday November 13, 2024

As the Climate Crisis Worsens, COP29 Feels Like a Show Without Substance

November 18, 2022

As COP29 opens in Azerbaijan, this year’s UN climate summit has quickly become less about hope and more about the world’s inability—or unwillingness—to unite on the climate crisis. The event has turned into a forum of empty promises and political theatrics, leaving little to encourage those looking for serious, concrete action. With catastrophic climate events mounting worldwide and the incoming U.S. administration preparing to withdraw from the Paris Accord, we are rapidly moving from a critical juncture to a dangerous decline in global climate cooperation.

The backdrop to COP29 is a world grappling with relentless climate disasters. In the U.S., North Carolina was battered by unprecedented flooding, while wildfires and smoke in California and New York have turned once-safe communities into danger zones. Across the Atlantic, Spain’s Valencia recently experienced its worst floods in modern history. Scientists warn that each year of inaction accelerates the damage, yet the atmosphere at COP29 is anything but urgent. This is underscored by the absence of major players. President Joe Biden skipped the conference altogether following Trump’s election victory, while China sent only a deputy and the European Commission’s President Ursula von der Leyen stayed away entirely.

News: Why Is a Petrostate Holding This Year’s Climate Talks?

December 17, 2022

Without the presence of such key world leaders, the climate talks risk becoming what frustrated observers see as little more than a stage for empty rhetoric. That’s further compounded by the rhetoric from Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, who used his keynote to lambast Western critics of his country’s oil industry rather than championing true climate action. His speech, coupled with remarks from UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres about the absurdity of doubling down on fossil fuels, shows the fractured reality: a tug-of-war between national interests and the well-being of the planet.

With climate finance taking centre stage, wealthy nations are once again being called to pay a fair share. For more than a decade, these countries have promised, and often failed, to mobilize $100 billion per year to support developing nations in mitigating climate impacts and shifting to cleaner energy. Canada, for instance, increased its pledge to $5.3 billion over five years, a figure that many argue is far too modest for the nation’s historical emissions contribution. Even with some countries pushing for increased commitments, the existing funding falls drastically short of the UN’s estimated need of $1.46 trillion annually by 2030—a figure that dwarfs current pledges and feels insurmountable given the economic and political landscapes.

News: COP29 climate summit host Azerbaijan lashes out at West in defence of oil and gas industry

November 10, 2021

Reader responses capture the growing discontent: many Canadians feel their tax dollars are being wasted on foreign climate pledges while fossil fuel subsidies at home keep the industry alive and well. Despite climate commitments, Canada continues to hand billions in subsidies to oil and gas sectors, mirroring a broader global hypocrisy. Meanwhile, developing nations who suffer the harshest climate impacts are left struggling to access funds while shouldering mounting debts.

Casting a dark shadow over COP29 is the election of Donald Trump, who has vowed to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Accord for the second time. This move threatens to destabilize any fragile climate consensus and will make America, the world’s largest historic carbon emitter, a climate rogue. With the U.S. pivoting away from international climate commitments, other nations may follow suit, leaving the Paris Accord toothless. Trump’s resurgence has emboldened climate denial and encouraged other fossil fuel interests, making it seem as though the world is stepping backward just as the effects of climate change become impossible to ignore.

One of the most damning aspects of the climate negotiations is the dual-track approach to funding. On one hand, wealthy nations direct money to initiatives like the Green Climate Fund, which funds renewable energy projects in low-income countries. On the other, these same countries funnel billions into fossil fuel subsidies to maintain their own energy security and economy. This two-faced approach not only undercuts climate finance but undermines the entire notion of a “green transition.” These contradictions leave everyday people wondering if the “green” in “green transition” refers more to money than to true environmental commitment.

News: How much does Canada owe in climate aid? A trillion-dollar question headlines COP29

November 4, 2023

Adding insult to injury, many climate finance contributions come as loans rather than grants, which traps poorer countries in debt rather than giving them the tools to build strong, independent green economies. Despite Canada’s pledge to move toward a 50-50 split between grants and loans, this ratio falls far short of the 60-40 split advocated by environmental groups. For small island nations and low-income countries already crippled by climate impacts, these loans feel like a betrayal.

The tragedy of COP29 is not just that it’s failing to deliver, but that it risks becoming irrelevant. With other global priorities—security, economic inflation, geopolitical conflicts—taking precedence, the climate crisis is slipping down the agenda for the countries most responsible for the damage. If wealthy nations remain unwilling to either act at home or support vulnerable nations abroad, the question will become not how we stop the climate crisis, but how we survive it.

July 30, 2024

The reality is bleak. In a world where wealthy nations hedge their bets on fossil fuel stability while paying lip service to climate goals, climate summits like COP29 become pageants of performative diplomacy rather than engines of change. The urgency of the climate crisis demands more than grandstanding; it requires coordinated global sacrifice and an unwavering commitment to real, painful change. Until world leaders confront their own contradictions and take true responsibility, every COP will be a hollow gathering of bluster, hypocrisy, and lost opportunity.

It’s time for action, not theatrics. We may not get another chance.

As COP29 opens in Azerbaijan, the climate summit spotlights a series of contradictions that paint a picture more of hypocrisy than of hope. In his keynote, Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev dismissed Western criticisms of his country’s oil reliance as “slander and blackmail.” His stance underscores the global paradox—leaders encourage a green transition but often default to fossil fuels, not least in resource-rich nations.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres followed Aliyev’s speech with a stark call-out: doubling down on fossil fuels, he argued, is an “absurd” strategy. Yet Guterres’s critique applies globally, not least to Canada, where green rhetoric runs headlong into the hard numbers: in 2023 alone, Ottawa shelled out over $18.6 billion in subsidies for fossil fuels, including billions for the Trans Mountain pipeline, financing for exports, and carbon capture ventures. Canada might fancy itself a climate champion, but it remains deeply invested in its petrostate reality.

Meanwhile, COP29’s developing-world attendees are justified in their frustration. They’ve been promised that wealthy countries would mobilize $100 billion annually since 2009 for climate adaptation. That goal, missed for years and only achieved in 2022, barely scratches the surface of what’s needed. It’s telling that even the Taliban—a group not often linked to environmental progress—arrived at COP29, urging wealthy nations to compensate for a crisis they “created.” That irony is rich, as is the uneasy spectacle of the world’s most powerful nations discussing climate finance in the luxurious halls of Baku.

But the circus hardly ends there. Despite promises of “sacrifice for the planet,” leaders in wealthier nations backslide when convenient—case in point, Justin Trudeau’s carve-out for home heating oil subsidies to placate Atlantic Canadian voters. As developing nations and vulnerable communities around the world brace for more severe climate impacts, it’s hard not to question whether the COP model, given its current direction, serves the world’s climate needs or is just window-dressing for yet another round of political expediency.

With the return of a climate-skeptic U.S. administration and high-profile absences from global leaders, COP29 feels more like a fractious forum for unmet promises and entrenched interests than the decisive moment we need. The stakes for climate action have never been higher, but with fossil fuel subsidies unabated and key leaders disengaged, the question lingers: can this COP deliver anything more than lip service to a rapidly worsening crisis?

– The Graeme Gallery

Read on Substack

Friday October 10, 2024

October 11, 2024 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday October 10, 2024

Animated making-of clip here!

As Hurricanes Wreak Havoc, Climate Denialism and Political Cowardice Endanger Us All

October 9, 2024

In the span of just a few weeks, Hurricanes Helene and Milton pummelled Florida with terrifying force, leaving behind destroyed homes, flooded streets, and devastated lives. Milton’s rapid intensification—from a Category 1 to a Category 5 in just 20 hours—was fuelled by abnormally warm waters in the Gulf of Mexico, waters made hotter and more dangerous by human-caused climate change. The science is clear, yet our political discourse remains bafflingly silent on the climate crisis. With just four weeks until the U.S. presidential election, climate change is treated as an afterthought. Even with the devastating storms and wildfires right in front of us, politicians play footsie with low-information voters instead of confronting the crisis with the urgency it demands.
The climate crisis should be the central issue of this election—and every election going forward—but denialism and political cowardice have ensured that it remains on the back burner. Instead of leaders addressing the existential threat we face, we get collective shrugs and vague talking points, with neither party rising to the occasion. The silence is deafening, and it’s costing us dearly.

There’s no mystery behind the muted response to the climate crisis, especially on the right. Climate denialism is rife within Republican ranks, supported by conservative think tanks and billionaire-funded interest groups with deep ties to the fossil fuel industry. The Heritage Foundation, for example, has long been one of the most vocal proponents of climate disinformation. These organizations fund campaigns and candidates, such as Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis, who are more than willing to perpetuate a narrative of deregulation, drilling, and exploitation of federal lands, all while dismissing or outright denying the existence of climate change.

News: Climate change fueled the fury of hurricanes Helene and Milton

January 17, 2024

In Florida, where voters are now facing the brutal consequences of climate inaction, these voices have been dominant for years. Governors like Jeb Bush, Rick Scott, and Ron DeSantis have actively worked to downplay the crisis. DeSantis even went so far as to push for the removal of “climate change” from school textbooks—a stunning display of willful ignorance as his state drowns, burns, and blows away in the face of increasingly severe storms.

Yet even as Republicans stick to their playbook of denial, the Democrats are no heroes in this story. While they talk a good game on climate change during off-election years, they grow timid as election day approaches. Their messaging softens, calibrated to avoid alienating swing voters and those skeptical of climate science. They fall into the same trap—political expediency over moral clarity.

The media, too, has played a role in the failure to elevate climate change in this election. In debates, press conferences, and interviews, climate change is either downplayed or entirely ignored. The recent presidential debates, for example, barely touched on the issue, even as record-breaking storms ripped through the Gulf of Mexico. It’s astonishing that in the midst of such climate devastation, the media has largely failed to forcefully question politicians on their environmental positions.

The result is a political landscape where climate change remains sidelined, reduced to a niche issue that can be pushed aside in favour of more politically convenient topics. This silence gives cover to deniallists and allows special interests to frame climate advocates as “alarmists.” Every time the science is minimized or ignored, every time climate change is excluded from the political conversation, we move further away from meaningful action.

September 28, 2004

We are no longer talking about climate change as a future threat—it is here, happening in real-time, as the articles on Hurricanes Milton and Helene demonstrate. Florida is just one battleground, but the crisis is global. From wildfires in Canada and California to atmospheric rivers causing unprecedented flooding, extreme weather is becoming the norm, not the exception. And this is just the beginning.

Without strong leadership, these devastating events will continue to escalate, and the cost of inaction will grow ever higher. In Florida, as one reader pointed out, the hurricanes could soon render parts of the state uninsurable and uninhabitable. Insurance companies are already pulling out, and the state’s leaders are doing little to prepare for the long-term consequences. The failure to address the climate crisis isn’t just a policy failure—it’s a failure of imagination and moral responsibility.

As Dr. Richard Alley, a leading glaciologist, has warned, rising ocean temperatures are also chewing away at the Antarctic Ice Sheet, accelerating the risk of catastrophic sea-level rise. This means that in addition to the immediate threats posed by stronger storms, we are facing long-term consequences that will affect every coastal community in the world. The people who continue to deny or downplay climate change are condemning future generations to deal with the fallout.

News: Record Hot Water Is Fueling Hurricane Milton

November 4, 2021

It’s clear where the blame lies. The fossil fuel industry, in its quest for profits, is repeating the same disinformation tactics that Big Tobacco used when it denied the dangers of smoking. And our political leaders, especially on the right, have sold out to these interests, while Democrats have failed to rise above political calculations and fully embrace the urgency of the moment.

This must change. We need leaders who will stop treating climate change as an inconvenient political issue and start addressing it as the defining crisis of our time. Courageous leadership means being honest with voters about the scale of the problem and the difficult decisions that lie ahead. It means standing up to special interests and enacting policies that will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, protect vulnerable communities, and build resilience for the future.

The time for half-measures and political maneuvering is over. If we don’t act now, storms like Helene and Milton will only grow stronger, and the damage they leave behind will become more catastrophic. The stakes couldn’t be higher. We owe it to ourselves, to future generations, and to the planet to demand action. And we owe it to the victims of these storms to stop letting denialism and cowardice win the day.

It’s time to end the silence. It’s time to act. (AI)

Wednesday September 25, 2024

September 25, 2024 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday September 25, 2024

Bring on the Carbon Tax Election: Confronting the Reality of Climate Change and the Cost of Inaction

September 14, 2024

Pierre Poilievre’s “Axe the Tax” campaign has struck a chord with many Canadians, positioning him as the frontrunner for the next election and framing the carbon tax as Public Enemy Number One. His rallying cry comes at a time when Canadians are struggling with inflation, housing shortages, and skyrocketing costs. But in the rush to ease voters’ anxieties, Poilievre is pushing an agenda that, in its simplicity, ignores a complex and pressing issue—climate change. The real danger isn’t the carbon tax itself, but the absence of any credible plan to address the climate crisis if Poilievre gets his way. In calling for a carbon tax election, Poilievre may get what he wants, but the real debate Canadians need is not just about scrapping a tax, but about how we will pay for the massive costs of climate inaction.

As Andrew Phillips highlights in his Toronto Star piece, while Canada prepares to abandon its carbon pricing strategy, the rest of the world is moving in the opposite direction. The Financial Times recently praised carbon pricing as the most efficient way to reduce emissions and incentivize cleaner energy. There are now 78 carbon pricing mechanisms in place globally, covering a quarter of global emissions. This growing global consensus reflects a simple economic principle: when you put a price on carbon, you force polluters to pay for the damage they cause, encouraging them to innovate and reduce emissions.

Opinion: The rest of the world knows the best tool to fight climate change. Canada is abandoning it

May 17, 2024

Yet, in Canada, Poilievre’s campaign feeds on fear and misinformation, painting a picture of economic devastation that carbon pricing simply hasn’t caused. Phillips points out how Poilievre’s claims of “mass hunger” and “nuclear winter” if the carbon tax increases are ludicrous. This kind of hyperbole might win votes, but it does a disservice to Canadians by treating them like they can’t handle the truth about the costs of climate policy. Phillips reminds us that the alternatives to carbon pricing—industrial pricing or green subsidies—are far more costly. There is no free lunch. We either pay for reducing emissions now, or face higher costs later, not only in dollars but in the mounting damage from unchecked climate change.

The global reality that Phillips emphasizes is crucial to understanding the stakes. Countries that don’t price carbon will increasingly face penalties on exports through mechanisms like the European Union’s carbon border adjustment tax. Canada, too, will not be exempt from this economic shift if it abandons carbon pricing. The world is moving away from fossil fuels, and the price for not keeping up will be steep—not just environmentally, but economically. This isn’t fear-mongering; it’s the reality of global trade and the green transition that Canada will have to navigate whether or not Poilievre wants to admit it.

Opinion: The conservative defeat of carbon pricing is the defeat of economics – and of conservatism

March 14, 2024

On the other hand, Andrew Coyne’s analysis in The Globe and Mail also lays bare the political and economic stakes of scrapping carbon pricing. Coyne argues that Poilievre’s “Axe the Tax” campaign may be brilliant politics but it is deeply flawed policy. By focusing only on the immediate costs of the carbon tax, Poilievre avoids confronting the much larger costs of doing nothing. Coyne points out that it’s not the tax itself that’s the problem—it’s the lack of a viable alternative. What Poilievre is offering Canadians is a temporary reprieve from paying for climate policy, but at the expense of real long-term solutions.

Like Phillips, Coyne highlights that while carbon pricing may not be popular, it is one of the most efficient tools we have to reduce emissions. The alternative—whether it’s more regulation, industry-targeted taxes, or massive green subsidies—is likely to be far more expensive. And, as Coyne reminds us, without a carbon tax, Canada risks falling behind in a global economy increasingly shaped by environmental policies. One Globe reader astutely observed that Poilievre is setting Canadians up to pay one way or another—whether through environmental destruction or through tariffs on our exports in the global market. Either way, we cannot dodge the costs.

The heart of the problem with Poilievre’s campaign is its focus on short-term political gain at the expense of long-term sustainability. He has tapped into real voter frustrations about affordability, but he’s selling Canadians a false choice. His message suggests that we can have lower costs today without paying for it tomorrow—a claim that simply doesn’t hold up in the face of climate science and economic reality.

November 21, 2023

Phillips rightly criticizes the vacuum of leadership in Canada’s climate policy debate. The Trudeau government, once hailed for introducing carbon pricing, now faces political abandonment, even from former allies like the NDP. As Canadians turn away from the Liberals, they’re not demanding a credible climate alternative—they’re just rejecting the current plan. Poilievre has capitalized on this by framing carbon pricing as the enemy, without offering any serious plan for how he would deal with the climate crisis.

Coyne echoes this criticism, noting that Poilievre’s anti-carbon tax stance is all about the politics of the moment and not about policy for the future. Coyne argues that the Conservatives have failed to offer any meaningful proposals to address climate change. The reality is that we can’t escape the costs of reducing emissions. Whether through a carbon tax or another mechanism, we will have to pay to clean up our economy. Scrapping the carbon tax without a credible replacement is simply kicking the can down the road—an irresponsible move for a country already experiencing the impacts of global warming.

If Poilievre wants a carbon tax election, let’s have one. But let’s ensure it’s based on facts, not the kind of fear-mongering he’s peddling. As both Coyne and Phillips argue, the real debate isn’t whether we need to pay for climate policy—it’s how we pay for it. Canadians deserve to hear the truth: fighting climate change will cost money, but failing to act will cost much more. If Poilievre wants to lead the country, he needs to offer a serious plan for reducing emissions, not just a catchy slogan.

At the end of the day, Canadians must confront the reality that the climate crisis isn’t going away. The rest of the world knows this, and while they’re adopting carbon pricing, we’re at risk of moving backwards. If Poilievre’s “Axe the Tax” campaign succeeds, it will be a political win for him, but a loss for Canada. And as Phillips warns, even if we dodge the carbon tax at home, we’ll pay the price in the international arena.

A carbon tax election could be the moment where Canadians finally confront the truth about the cost of climate action—or inaction. But to get there, we need an honest debate, not political theatre. (AI)

Tuesday July 30, 2024

July 30, 2024 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday July 30, 2024

Past Time for Thoughts and Prayers: Demand Action on Climate Disasters

June 20, 2024

The recent wildfire that devastated Jasper, Alberta, has left a profound sense of sadness and helplessness, resonating deeply with those who witness the increasing number of such catastrophic events. Chris Hatch’s commentary on the wildfire captures this sentiment, highlighting how the emotional toll extends beyond those directly affected. Similarly, Susan Riley’s piece on our persistent inaction in the face of climate change argues that we must move past the stage of offering “thoughts and prayers” and take concrete action.

Opinion:Jasper and the great sadness

May 14, 2024

Over the past decade, the frequency and intensity of wildfires have increased dramatically, a trend directly linked to climate change. Rising temperatures, prolonged droughts, and altered precipitation patterns have made forests drier and more prone to fires. As a result, fire seasons are longer, and the fires themselves are more severe and destructive. The devastation in Jasper, where over 30% of the town’s structures were damaged or destroyed, is a stark example of this growing phenomenon. The expansion of human settlements into wild land areas has also exacerbated the impact of wildfires. Towns like Jasper, nestled within forests, are particularly vulnerable. Decades of fire suppression policies have allowed combustible materials to accumulate, creating conditions ripe for larger, more intense wildfires.

July 29, 2023

The response to wildfires has been hampered by systemic issues such as budget cuts, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and prioritization of fossil fuel infrastructure over fire preparedness. These factors have left communities like Jasper ill-equipped to handle such disasters, leading to significant loss and prolonged recovery periods. Riley emphasizes the urgency of addressing the root causes of these disasters—primarily our continued reliance on fossil fuels. Despite the clear link between fossil fuel emissions and climate change, the oil and gas industry continues to expand, with government support. This expansion directly contradicts climate commitments and perpetuates the cycle of destruction and inaction.

Tuesday April 2, 2024

To break this cycle, we must reduce fossil fuel dependency by shifting away from fossil fuels and investing in renewable energy sources, implementing stricter regulations on emissions, and halting the expansion of oil and gas infrastructure. Enhancing fire preparedness and response by increasing funding for fire prevention and firefighting resources, improving forest management practices, and bolstering early warning systems and emergency response capabilities is essential. Comprehensive climate adaptation strategies are also necessary to protect communities from the impacts of climate change, such as building resilient infrastructure, protecting natural buffers like wetlands, and supporting community-based adaptation efforts. Holding leaders accountable by electing those genuinely committed to addressing climate change and ensuring that climate policies are implemented effectively is crucial.

Opinion: Pumping more oil while the house burns down: how long will the fantasy last?

February 6, 2020

The devastation in Jasper and many other communities affected by wildfires and climate disasters underscores the urgent need for action. Recent years have seen similar destruction in places such as Paradise, California, which was nearly obliterated by the Camp Fire in 2018; Santa Rosa, California, heavily impacted by the Tubbs Fire in 2017; and Lytton, British Columbia, which was largely destroyed by a fire in 2021. More recently, Lahaina in Hawaii faced severe devastation from wildfires in 2023. It is no longer enough to offer thoughts and prayers after each catastrophe. We must demand decisive action to address the root causes of these disasters and build a more resilient and sustainable future. As Susan Riley poignantly asks, “What will it take to shake us from our willful blindness?” The answer lies in our collective ability to push for meaningful change before it is too late. By recognizing the gravity of the situation and acting decisively, we can honor the memories of places like Jasper and ensure that future generations are not condemned to witness the same cycle of destruction and inaction. (AI)