Everyone heard Australia's fires killed billions of animals

But we weren't told this happens every year

Rough estimates show 2019-20 was actually one of the least deadly fires in 120 years.

Last century: 16 billion animals harmed each year
2000s: 9 billion
2019-20: 6 billion
As discussed below, this rough estimate uses the same, but simplified, calculations as the original 1 (and later 3) billion claim

Original total number killed/harmed: vertebrates/ha*area burned

As reptiles make up 87% of all harmed, and Australia average is 200/ha:
WWF found 3 billion, because only counted in "uncharacteristic" burn areas

But surely a burned animal matter equally whether its fire is covered on TV or not?

Burning elsewhere was *much* lower, hence many fewer harmed there (we ought to know that, too)

wwf.org.au/ArticleDocumen…
The original 1 billion estimate was from Professor Dickman, who focused on NSW and then some more

sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/n…
The "billion animals dead in Australia's fires" meme got extraordinary coverage

An irresistibly simple measure of "OMG-bad"

leading to the wrong conclusion

vox.com/future-perfect…
abcnews.go.com/International/…
people.com/pets/australia…
smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/mor…
straitstimes.com/asia/australia…
The 1 billion estimate was explicitly based on the 2007 WWF report "Impacts of Land Clearing"

sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/n…
researchgate.net/publication/31…
Report uses similar approach (vertebrates/ha*area burned) and finds about 80% of all dead are reptiles

It starts with Australia average of 200 reptiles/ha, and says number higher in large areas of desert land, so smaller in NSW at 129.5/ha (25.9*5, p30)
researchgate.net/publication/31…
The final 3 billion report uses a lot more careful modeling of population density

Clearly 61K killed/harmed koalas of 260K population is terrible

But overarching main message is "3 billion", of which 87% are reptiles

wwf.org.au/ArticleDocumen…
For reptiles, researchers use lots of specific estimates for population density and find 2.46 billion killed/harmed

They also show that the simple 200/ha gives a very similar but slightly more conservative estimate of 2.29 billion (7% lower)
If you want to estimate the number of animals killed/harmed from Australian fire, you can't just pick favorite fires

I use *all* burned area

Australia-wide all-species number can conservatively be estimated using just reptiles, since they constitute vast majority of all dead
2019-20 was unusual in that it had *much more* fire in eucalyptus forests and much less fire in Grass and Woodland

— more fire where WWF estimated dead, much less where they didn't

Here, I'm using the Australian average of 200 reptiles/ha

This is likely very conservative for central Australia, which prof Dickman says is "reptile-rich"

And we know that species density is much higher, and likely also population density
…ublish-csiro-au.stanford.idm.oclc.org/book/7845/
3 billion killed/harmed story relies on counting animals only in TV-covered fires

Estimated across all fires in 2019-20, likely 6.1 billion vertebrates were killed/harmed

An approximation, but unlikely to change qualitative result (size of 2019-20 compared to other years)
You were told a story of 3 billion killed/harmed animals

And without context, it was easy to stun you and make you assume this was worst-ever

You were told that it was "unprecedented" and one of the "worst wildlife disasters in modern history"

but no

wwf.org.au/ArticleDocumen…
Because fires in non-counted areas were *much* lower than usual, the total vertebrate killed/harmed in 2019-20 was actually one of the lowest in the last 120 years

Context matters for making good decisions

Fire data, with links here
More context: Is 6.1 billion mostly dead reptiles a lot?

Each year, Australia's 2 million feral cats kill 2 billion reptiles publish.csiro.au/wr/WR17160

Each year, 30+ billion reptiles die of all causes (library.museum.wa.gov.au/fullRecord.jsp…) of a population of 154 billion
The largest documented fire in Australia in 1974-75, at 117 million ha, likely killed 23 billion reptiles (117m ha*200/ha)

p44 from amazon.com/Burning-Bush-F…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Bjorn Lomborg

Bjorn Lomborg Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BjornLomborg

9 Mar
Hilarious (and quite off) replies from committed climate alarmists to my graph

Contrary to breathless climate reporting, Australia wasn't "ablaze" in 2019-20

Burned area was actually one of the *lowest* since 1900

Many said "but <reasons> reduced fire"

Of course, but *we were never told fire declines*

None of the breathless reporting said: "Burned area has declined dramatically, and is now at historical lows"

Instead, they said "Australia is on fire, literally"

nbcnews.com/science/enviro…
Many chastised me for using "wrong measure" of "burned area"

Yet, I use same measure as official "Australia's Environment" annual overview

It also concludes "well below average"

I suspect "wrong measure" means "doesn't support scary story"

wenfo.org/aer/wp-content…
Read 5 tweets
7 Mar
Fires burned 10% of Australia's land surface on average every year in 20th century

In this century, it burned 6% (2001-19)

We now have the data for 2019-20, the year with "Australia ablaze":

4% (3.95%)

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.…. globalfiredata.org/analysis.html nature.com/articles/d4158… Image
Yes, tragedies: Much more fire close to where people live (NSW and Victoria)

But we were told "Australia burns" and "this is what a climate crisis looks like"

No

Australia had one of its lowest areas burned in last 120 years

And fires inconsistent with climate impact Image
Along with bad media coverage, misleading graphics pushed the idea that the Australian continent was ablaze


Image
Read 8 tweets
27 Feb
US 2021 top priorities: economy, covid and jobs

Climate change towards bottom (but no longer last as it used to be)

pewresearch.org/politics/2021/…
US Democrats' top priorities for 2021: Corona, economy, race

Climate change is 9th

pewresearch.org/politics/2021/…
US Republicans' top priorities for 2021: economy, no terror, jobs

Climate change decisively last

pewresearch.org/politics/2021/…
Read 4 tweets
23 Feb
Despite breathless climate reporting, deaths from malaria, heat, diarrhea, malnutrition and dengue *lower* by 2050, according to WHO

Here dengue; climate will delay progress slightly, from 2049 to 2050

ihmeuw.org/5dx9, who.int/healthinfo/glo…, apps.who.int/iris/handle/10…
It is the same with heat deaths: by 2050 they will still be much lower than current cold deaths

As we saw with malnutrition, climate will not make deaths go up, but slow progress slightly
Read 8 tweets
18 Feb
Despite the breathless climate reporting, global heat deaths by 2050 will still be much lower than current cold deaths

This according to WHO's estimates of additional heat deaths from climate warming
apps.who.int/iris/handle/10…
here from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P… Image
As we saw with malnutrition, climate will not make deaths go up, but slow progress slightly
Read 7 tweets
14 Feb
Climate slightly slows progress (problem, not end-of-world)

Technology and higher incomes make us much more resilient, compared to climate problems

Here is one of world's leading child killers, malnutrition

According to WHO, mortality keeps declining, even in a warming world
Malnutrition was the risk-factor behind 7m deaths in 1990

Today, around 2.78m

by 2050, 554K

WHO estimates global warming will cause an extra 85K, equivalent to delaying progress by less than 3 years

ihmeuw.org/5dmb, apps.who.int/iris/handle/10…
We see the same trend with malaria

Although global warming will make malaria worse, it is overwhelmingly improved by technology and resilience
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!