You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Here’s how European fires differ from those in the American West.

With late-season fires on Portuguese Madeira and Spanish Tenerife recently brought under control, European nations can finally begin to relax after a historic and deadly wildfire season. The mainland continent experienced “far more fires and a larger burned area [in 2023] than in an average fire season,” The New York Times reports, including the single largest wildfire in the EU since record-keeping began in 2000, in Greece.
In the United States, we’re used to words like “historic” and “deadly” when it comes to our wildfires. American fire researchers often point to the U.S. Forest Service’s long history of wildfire suppression as a big reason why we have the cycle of megafires that we do today. Fire had long been a natural part of the ecosystem of the American West; if the land is prevented from burning, plants grow up thick in the underbrush, turning forests into explosive tinderboxes that, once ignited, burn out of control. This is part of why U.S. fire managers emphasize the importance of prescribed burns and teaming up with Indigenous fire practitioners, whose centuries of stewardship helped to keep the North American landscape healthy.
But what’s the deal with Europe, where there isn’t the same legacy of outlawing managed burns and wildfires still seem to be getting bigger and worse by the year?
The first thing to understand is the ways in which U.S. and European fires are the same. Both are being fanned by the same global conditions: “Climate change has led to numerous environmental changes that can increase the frequency and magnitude of dangerous fire weather — increased drought, high air temperatures, low relative humidity, dry lightning, and strong winds, resulting in hotter, drier, and longer fire seasons,” a 2022 United Nations report found. A 2021 study supported by NOAA in the U.S. likewise describes climate change as “the main driver of the increase in fire weather in the western United States.”
The second thing to understand is the ways in which the fires on the two continents are different.
In the U.S., the danger of wildfires to human life and property tends to be exacerbated by the way development has expanded further and further into the vast, unmaintained, “empty” wildlands that make up most of the land in the West. By contrast, fire problems that arise in Europe are largely because people have left the landscape.
Humans have been lighting fires on the European continent for a very, very long time. “The latest studies show that human-driven fires [were already affecting] landscape transformation in the Central European Lowlands 8,500 years ago,” researchers at the University of Latvia explain in a 2021 paper about European fire frequency. The main purpose of those human-started fires had been to clear land for agriculture and grazing, but the practice has gone on for so long that it “has left [regions of Europe] with a complex pattern of land-covers and fire occurrence that shows little if any resemblance of a natural fire regime,” a separate study in the Journal of Environmental Management explains.
Until fairly recently, this more or less worked out okay: People managed the land they lived on, set low-intensity fires to burn new pastures or fields, and sometimes put out fires if they happened to threaten property or life. The problems began when people started moving away from farms and into the cities during the 20th century. In a study by the Journal of Environmental Management researchers, which looked at Italy, there was a 20% drop in agricultural areas and a 74% increase in flammable forest cover between 1960 and 2000.
The abandonment of the countryside was particularly pronounced in Eastern Europe, where the collective farms of the Soviet Union were left to go fallow after the fall of the Iron Curtain — from “Poland through Slovakia to Ukraine, an estimated 16 percent of farmland has been abandoned since 1988,” Wired reports — but southern Europe has also seen a land-use shift due to aging farming populations and general rural decline. “In the past three decades,” Wired goes on, “Europe has seen a net loss of farmland larger than Switzerland.”
What that means in practice is that land that had once been managed by rural farmers has been left to return to its original and unmonitored state, whether that’s grasslands, shrublands, or, especially, forests. While it’s taken them a few decades to spring up, these new trees are especially prone to burning: The European Data Journalism Network (EDJNet) reports that in Spain, for instance, forests made up 27% of the overall acres burned by wildfires between 2000 and 2005, but jumped to 42% between 2017 and 2022. In the same time frame, forest fires went from making up a quarter of wildfire-affected lands in Finland to 40%. As EDJNet adds, “The current fire map of Europe is, in this sense, an illustration of the rural exodus and abandonment of the countryside.”
In trying to fight these new forest fires, Europe has fallen into the same “fire paradox” that we have in the United States: the better you are at putting out fires, the more chances you give to fire-prone vegetation between the trees to grow out of control, so when the next fire hits, it’s much worse. This is also where climate change comes back into play: By drying out dead grasses and other plants in these newly abandoned landscapes during the hot summers, the warming planet makes the forests especially vulnerable to flare-ups.
Though the U.S. and Europe have, in a sense, largely had opposite land-use problems — in the American West, people are moving too deep into the countryside, while in Europe, people are typically moving out — the solutions might actually be the same. Fire managers on both continents are encouraging local communities and governments to revitalize farmland as a means of combating worsening fire seasons. In the U.S., this might work by surrounding urban areas with a “buffer” of farms, in order to separate human development from a naturally fire-prone landscape. In Europe, it might take the form of agroforestry, or mixed-use forest-and-farmland, to help break up otherwise homogeneous and flammable swaths of forest or fields.
It might be easier said than done: the number of farmers and size of farmland has been on the decline in both the U.S. and Western Europe for decades, and it will take enormous socioeconomic shifts to reverse that trend. But while American and European fires might be different beasts with their own histories, their overlap also poses an opportunity. The U.S. European Command has helped fight fires in Greece; Portugal is one of the international wildfire partners of the U.S. Department of the Interior. And while fire season might be largely over on both sides of the Atlantic this year between now and the first flare-up of spring, there will be so much to learn — from each other.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Current conditions: In the central Pacific, Hurricane Nolo lashed Hawaii as a Category 2 storm with winds of up to 105 miles per hour • In the eastern Pacific, Hurricane Polo whacked the Southern California coast with seven-foot swells • In the western Pacific, Typhoon Surigae is barreling toward Okinawa, Japan, and the Philippines’ most populous island, Luzon.

Nearly 200,000 households across the northeastern United States lost electricity over the weekend as a powerful nor’easter storm walloped the nation’s most densely populated region with winds topping 70 miles per hour. Tens of thousands more Americans suffered outages in Hawaii as Hurricane Nolo brushed past the storm-struck archipelago state. By Sunday night, however, just over 90,000 households remained without access to the grid, according to data on the U.S. Power Outage tracker. Of those, roughly 19,000 each were located in New York and Hawaii. As of this morning, the total number dropped to just under 54,000.

Americans experienced an average of 11 hours of power interruptions in 2024, nearly twice as many as the annual average in the decade before, according to an analysis last year by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That was largely due to an increase in powerful storms right as the grid is growing older and the equipment needed to repair and upgrade the system is in short supply. An expert cited in a feature story in The New York Times Magazine last month on the mounting risk of blackouts in the U.S. warned that the country could be thrust into darkness for 18 months or longer if saboteurs took out major transformers.
President Donald Trump plans to slash fuel efficiency rules on new cars and light trucks Monday, in his administration’s latest effort to undo regulations meant to curb emissions and save drivers money over the operating lives of their vehicles. In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said he had “just approved new Fuel Economy Standards,” falsely claiming that former President Joe Biden had imposed a “mandate” to buy electric vehicles under the most recent update to the rulebook. “The Dumocrats cost our Great Auto Manufacturers $Billions, forced Americans into cars they never wanted, and wasted Billions on Chargers that were never built,” he wrote. “These new Standards will take the waste out of building cars in America.” In his own post on X, Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy said the final proposal would be released Monday. It wasn’t immediately clear how the agency would alter the rules, but the shift is expected to significantly weaken the standards. The move highlights Trump’s reliance on what the Rhodium Group described earlier this year to my colleague Robinson Meyer as “outdated economics” to justify cars that are cheaper to manufacture but more expensive to drive.
China will import at least 10 million metric tons of coal from the U.S. next year and again in 2028, according to a White House fact sheet. The deal, which came out of last week’s summit between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, is part of an overall pledge to ease tariffs on as much as $30 billion of goods exchange between the two superpowers. In 2023, the U.S. exported roughly 5.9 million metric tons of coal to China, making the People’s Republic the fifth-largest overseas buyer of American coal that year, after India, Japan, the Netherlands, and Brazil. But U.S. exports overall dropped off last year after Beijing halted orders amid the trade war Trump kicked off. The latest purchase agreement helps to restore the American market share lost due to Chinese tariffs.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
New York wants to build 5 gigawatts of new nuclear reactors, the largest buildout of any other state and far more capacity than the U.S. has added nationwide in decades. During the New York Climate Week festivities last week, the head of the state energy office, the president of the grid operator, and top advisers to Governor Kathy Hochul appeared at a pro-nuclear summit to assure investors, industry officials, and rival states that Albany was moving full-speed ahead. In a public comment submitted to Hochul and state energy regulators last week, however, three dozen state legislators called nuclear reactors “environmentally destructive, expensive, and slow-to-build,” and called instead for devoting all Albany’s spending on new power generation to wind turbines, solar panels, and batteries. Of the signatories, nine lawmakers are Democratic Socialists of America, such as state senators Jabari Brisport, Julia Salazar, and Emily Gallagher — all close allies and friends of the nationally influential New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Much of the rest of the list are self-described progressives.
But the former base of left-wing political power in the U.S. — labor unions — are taking the exact opposite position. In its own public comment, Climate Jobs NY, a coalition of unions that support decarbonization as a way to increase employment, said the only way for New York “to establish a carbon-free energy sector” is to “rely on nuclear power,” which just so happens to boast the most unionized workforce of any energy sector. “There is no other clean firm, or baseload power that can supply industrial operations at scale,” the organization wrote. “Solar, wind and battery storage are essential to our energy supply in the state, but they cannot provide all of the baseload power that our state depends on. For this reason, among others, nuclear must be a key part of New York’s energy future.” Fred Stafford, the pseudonymous energy writer and researcher who has written for Heatmap, pondered on X: “Can the Left be torn away from dead-end environmental nonprofits and renewables developers and instead align with the state’s climate-focused labor unions when it comes to nuclear?”
If you were looking for a sign that the European Union’s hydrogen ambitions are dimming, consider this: Brussels just announced that it was going after all but one of its member states for failing to enshrine the bloc-wide hydrogen rules into national law. The EU launched what are called “infringement proceedings” — a procedural punishment that can result in financial sanctions — against 26 of the 27 countries in the continental bloc. Brussels adopted the Hydrogen and Decarbonized Gas directive in 2024, and gave countries two years to pass national laws that match the guidelines for establishing domestic clean fuel industries. When the deadline passed early last month, just one nation had met the qualifications, according to Hydrogen Insight: Italy.
When I interviewed Ernest Moniz, the secretary of energy under former President Barack Obama, at a Climate Week event last Wednesday, he told me “nothing has hit the jackpot” on clean fuels just yet. But given that only 21% of end-use energy worldwide is served by electricity, the hunt for affordable, scalable, clean molecules is central to any potential decarbonization effort in the future.
Ford Motor produces more than 300,000 pickup trucks and sports utility vehicles at its assembly plant in Hermosillo, Mexico, every year. But the facility has been plagued lately by the kind of pest you normally find on city streets: pigeons. Enter: El Charro. The automaker’s “latest employee of the month,” according to The Wall Street Journal, is a hawk the Mexican plant brought on to hunt the pigeons. “It has given very good results,” Jesus Teran, central maintenance manager at Hermosillo and a 25-year veteran at the facility, told the newspaper. The bird’s name harkens to the Mexican term for cowboy.
A permitting deal seems closer than ever — but possibly delayed til after the election.
This is an edition of Heatmap Daily, an evening review of the day’s news written by our executive editor. Sign up for it here.
Good afternoon and happy Friday.
Let’s start with the news: The new episode of our podcast, Shift Key, is my full interview with U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, which we recorded at Heatmap House in New York on Wednesday.
Listen to it here. You can find it on Heatmap’s website or wherever you get your podcasts. You don’t need to be a Heatmap subscriber to tune in.
My colleagues at Heatmap have covered a few takeaways from our conversation — including Secretary Wright’s prediction that there will not be a “blanket ban” on U.S. diesel exports, which he then hedged slightly — but we haven’t previewed everything, and I think the conversation is still worth your time. A few highlights:
We discussed the Trump administration’s lengthy war on wind and whether it might end in the future. “I do believe a successful permitting reform … changes the playing field for anything you want to build in this country, including wind,” Wright said. He also explained why he thought congressional Democrats should trust the administration’s word about that.
Wright hit on the Energy Department’s program to build a new fleet of nuclear reactors across the country, which could (if successful) bring roughly 10 gigawatts of zero-carbon electricity capacity online across five sites. There are now “well more than five” companies interested in entering the deal, he said, meaning that five will soon be selected. Allegedly there was a dinner last night to discuss the program, but we haven’t heard anything more about it.
Also up for discussion: whether the United States is leaning too hard into natural gas, how China has buttressed the global economy from the Strait of Hormuz oil shock, and why Wright thinks China is now the “swing importer” of oil globally and has successfully “taken off the peaks” of global pricing.
“If [China] were listening to me for their energy policy — and they are not — but if they were, I’d have them ramp up those refineries more rapidly because they have oil, the world has oil, but we’re very, very tight on refining capacity right now,” he said.
It was a fascinating conversation. Some of it pointed to ways that American energy policy will need to evolve in the future, regardless of which president or party is in charge. You can find it wherever you get your podcasts: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, YouTube.
***
I’d be loath not to mention — at least briefly — all the movement in the past week on permitting reform.
When we last checked in on permitting over the summer, Daniel Palken, the head of infrastructure at Arnold Ventures, helped me understand the emerging outline of a bipartisan compromise deal on energy and infrastructure permitting. Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico also sketched the state of negotiations for us in August.
Since then, I had heard that Senate negotiators were making progress, but had not heard many concrete details. But this week we saw a flurry of activity. At the beginning of the week, the White House seemed to want to move quickly to seal a compromise, promising to allow stalled solar and wind projects to proceed in return for getting something inked before the midterm elections. (That said, actually getting a law passed before the November 3 elections would have required Speaker Mike Johnson to bring his caucus back to Washington, D.C.)
But late on Wednesday, Senate Democrats signaled that they want to slow down the talks and seemingly delay any deal until after November. “We believe there is a good deal to be had,” the lead Democratic negotiators, Senator Heinrich and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, said in a statement today. But “getting that [deal] right has to matter more than election-year deadlines.”
As a reminder, any permitting deal will need at least 60 votes in the Senate in order to clear the filibuster hurdle. That means such a deal will almost certainly need to be bipartisan — and therefore that a deal can only come together in a political environment where legislators from both parties feel like they can plausibly prosper in the near-term by making it easier to build. Right now, it seems like both parties do feel that way, even if they’re bickering about whether to get a deal done before or after November.
I have been careful not to endorse any bill until I see it, of course. It will all depend on what’s in the final text. But it would be a mistake, I think, for House and Senate Democrats to let this legislating opportunity pass them by if they are indeed so close to a deal that the decarbonization hawks Whitehouse and Heinrich feel good about. Just because Congress reaches a deal now doesn’t mean it can’t reach another one in the future. As we’ve discussed on Shift Key, recent history suggests that when lawmakers adjust one part of the law or one statute, they feel more comfortable returning to it in the future, making further addendums as needed.
Remember: Because federal permitting laws chiefly constrain what the government can do, they act as a brake primarily on public infrastructure. It took years, recall, for state and local governments in New York to get the permits necessary to implement their own scheme to tax traffic congestion in New York City. If you want to build big new infrastructure in the United States, be it high-speed trains, transmission lines, or zero-carbon power plants — and if you specifically want the government to build public works faster and better than it has in recent decades — then you should want a different federal permitting scheme than we have now. Let’s hope congressional Democrats remember that in the days, weeks, and months to come.
Plus more on nuclear, EVs, China, and more, recorded live at our Heatmap House event at New York Climate Week.
Since taking office last year, the Trump administration has blocked renewable energy development and attacked climate change policy, prioritized fossil fuels and encouraged nuclear energy, and started a war that led to a global oil and gas supply shock.
U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright has been the face of much of that policy agenda. For this episode of Shift Key, he joined Rob for a live conversation at our Heatmap House event, part of New York Climate Week. He answered questions about the Trump administration’s war on wind, a ban on diesel fuel exports, and how China has been able to buttress global oil supplies since the spring.
Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.
Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.
Here is an excerpt from their conversation:
Robinson Meyer: Okay, let’s move to wind. So broadly, the Trump administration has seemed to have an issue with wind. It has taken a number of measures to block wind permits. I realize not all of these measures happened within the Department of Energy, but they have happened throughout the government. This has happened at the same time the grid is screaming for new sources of energy. So why wouldn’t a policy of American energy dominance embrace all forms of American energy, including wind?
Chris Wright: I would say it does. But there have been serious concerns in rural America and certainly in coastal America about development of wind farms. With the war in Russia, Ukraine, you see the change with drones. So there are legitimate national security concerns. I hope there’s mitigations and solutions to work it out. I suspect there will be, but I wouldn’t take all the administration’s activity as somehow like just to hamstring wind. There’s reasons for what’s going on behind the scenes. And I think you’ll see a robust development pathway going forward.
Meyer: Do you think that — I would say that it is hard to believe that, necessarily, when the president has been so personally vocal about wind?
Wright: He is not a fan of wind energy. I will give you that. But also when you talk about it, I’ll give you that 100%. The other thing I think you’ve got to look at is, what he cares about is grid security and affordability of prices in the United States. He wants to reshore modern manufacturing here. We want to lead in artificial intelligence, which means you’ve got to have a grid that’s affordable as possible and that’s secure. What matters for an electricity grid is who’s there at peak demand time.
You know, we had a very cold, very cold East Coast this year. On January 27 in the evening, peak demand time in New England, wind, solar, and batteries combined were 2% of New England electric generation. We got 3% from burning trash in wood. So, you know, when we talk about the average amount of electricity generated by sources, this and that, it’s not a realistic representation of what underlines and secures the grid.
Our main thing was 35 years of subsidies is enough. Let’s take the training wheels off and let things run from there. There are roles for different energy technologies in different places, but mandating things, forcing things on, and subsidizing things for decades, it just makes energy more expensive.
Meyer: So the subsidies for wind are going away. They were repealed. They were in the Inflation Reduction Act. They were repealed by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. I think the level of obstacles that we’ve seen from the administration has exceeded kind of just subsidies. It’s been any kind of permitted delay. You know, offices that previously approved permits are now, we’re blocking them. Do you think that this, first of all, why kind of block things if the subsidies have gone away? And two, do you think that is going to change going forward?
Wright: So look, I’m not at the center of that. That’s Interior, that’s Department of War. Those are other issues really outside of my purview. You’re right. Wind has been very controversial, and there have been very spirited dialogues in the administration about this. I do believe a successful permitting reform thing changes the playing field for anything you want to build in this country, including wind.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
Chris Wright Doesn’t Think We’ll Have a Diesel Export Ban
Trump Keeps Wind Farms Waiting Despite Court Ruling
Trump’s War Against Wind Energy: A Timeline
Previously on Shift Key: How China Saved the World From Trump’s Energy Crisis
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
RE+ 26 is the largest clean energy event in North America, happening November 16th through 19th at the Las Vegas Convention Center. Register at re-plus.com and use code SHIFTKEY20 to save 20% off a Full Conference pass.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.