Which city in Canada needs to burn down to convince people that devastating wildfires are now a thing that happens, and a thing that needs to be taken seriously?
If you reply with:
We need better forest policy.
We must stop using fossil fuels.
Carbon tax alone won't solve this.
Blame the voters.
Blame the current govts.
Blame oil companies.
No govt in Canada is doing enough on climate change.
Jail arsonists.
Yes. Sure. But all of that.
@SteveLloyd001
Speaking of conjuring, I forbade the use of fire (candles, matches, lighters) in K's witchcraft escapades the other night. "But ALL witchcraft needs fire!!!" "Too bad, so sad, the city is parched. Burning it down would be bad." Now I'm mean Mummy. π€·π»ββοΈ (They improvised. All good.)
@Liv_F
Fort McMurray failed to shift the needle in Alberta, so I reckon that we will just learn to accept that cities just burn down from time to time.
Ya know, a new normal.
@BCReality
That the government of Canada could see Fort McMurray burn down, and respond by doub β tripling down and building a pipeline to help export more from the oil sands tells you everything about how far removed we are from the reality of what needs to be done.
@RobertaStaley
The Government of Canada followed up the Fort Mac fire by building a pipeline to triple oil sands exports β the opposite of keeping it in the ground.
No, you're right. What happens out west (and maybe in the north, we'll see whether Yellowknife matters), doesn't move policy.
@sheilawalker73
That's an and, not an or. We need better forest management, education about fire risks during times of extreme drought, better water management, smarter housing development, more impactful climate action.
There are lots of things that need to be done that aren't being done.