September 13, 2022 • 21 mins
Wildfire smoke can seriously impact humans' health, but scientists have discovered that it can also affect the health of ecosystems. On the Living With Fire Podcast, Professor Sudeep Chandra, director of the Global Water Center at the University of Nevada, Reno, talks about how scientists have been working to understand these impacts on Lake Tahoe's aquatic ecosystem.
Stakeholders in the Tahoe Basin have been working for decades to “Keep Tahoe Blue,” and have been trying to control algae growth in the lake. Chandra explains that one direct effect wildfire smoke can potentially have on the lake is stimulating algae growth.
"So just like Miracle-Gro has a nice combination of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium to grow our garden plants, it turns out smoke has a ratio of nitrogen to phosphorus. Sometimes it's optimal, and sometimes it's not," explains Chandra.
In addition to providing nutrients for fertilizing algae, Chandra explains that smoke can also affect the amount of light hitting the lake, potentially reducing the amount of ultraviolet light, which kills algae cells.
With wildfires occurring more frequently and becoming more intense, Assistant Professor Christina Restaino, director of the Living With Fire program, explained what it's like for scientists working in fire right now.
"We're entering this new era of no analog experiences, where these ecosystems are experiencing this smoke every single year or fire every single year. We don't have an analog from the past to understand that. So yeah, it's exciting, and it's really unknown."
To learn more, check out the resources below:
- Caldor Fire impact on Lake Tahoe’s clarity, ecology studied amidst ongoing wildfire season
- Global Water Center
- Living With Fire
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Megan Kay (00:10):
This is the living with fire podcast brought to you
by the living with Fire Programat the University of Nevada Reno
extension.
Sudeep Chandra (00:20):
And what's happening today, as everyone is
noticing, five years ago, we hada fire four years ago, we had
fires three years ago, we hadfires two years ago, the
frequency or the amount over aparticular period of time of
these fires is increasing a lot.
That is where the hot sciencesright now because historically,
the lake could recover becausethe fires didn't occur as much.
(00:41):
But now year after year, you'regetting poked in the in the
chest. Does your body eventuallyrespond probably.
Megan Kay (00:55):
Hi there, I'm Megan Kay, your host and Outreach
Coordinator for the living fireprogram. And you're listening to
the first episode of season twoof the living with fire podcast.
It's been a while since we'vereleased new episodes, and we're
excited to be back. We've beenbusy this year, traveling all
across the state of Nevada,working with communities and
educating folks about how toprepare for wildfire. We've also
(01:19):
been working on some new andexciting projects, which we'll
tell you more about later on thepodcast. So with these episodes
that we're putting out in 2022,we really wanted to focus on
aspects of living with fire thatare maybe not always visible,
that are unseen. And so thatmade us think about wildfire
(01:41):
smoke and its impacts not onlyon health, but ecosystems. You
just heard from Professor SudeepChandra
Sudeep Chandra (01:48):
Sudeep Chandra at the University of Nevada,
Reno, I'm a professor in thebiology department and I direct
the University's Global WaterCenter and the Aspen Institute
for Global Studies.
Megan Kay (01:58):
So last August, August 2021, when the Kaldor
fire was burning and threateningLake Tahoe, I became aware of
some research that the GlobalWater Center was doing about
wildfire smoke and its effect onLake Tahoe. So I kind of filed
that away in my memory. And whenwe were putting together topics
(02:18):
for this season of the podcast,I really wanted to get to talk
to Professor Chandra about thatresearch. We're also joined by
Dr. Kristina Rossano, thedirector of the living with FIRE
program, I'm so glad she wasonly interview she offered a lot
of insight was able to kind ofexpand on some topics. So enjoy
that conversation and enjoy thisepisode. Thanks.
(02:46):
So how long have you been withyou? And
Sudeep Chandra (02:49):
yeah, so I've been here at the University of
Nevada, for 16 years, I had alittle stint where I left for a
little bit to go to Washington,DC, but then came back. And most
of my work involves these kindof interconnectedness of trying
to understand water systems,whether rivers or lakes as a as
a limnology list and what thatmeans for society. But then we
(03:12):
do some basic research on theinfluence of climate or
wildfires on lakes. So it'ssomewhat societal, but it's also
just kind of what happens tonatural biodiversity or the
functioning of ecosystems. So
Megan Kay (03:24):
So what have you can I just want to back up real
quick and describe not juststudying water and biodiversity
but water in people?
Sudeep Chandra (03:31):
Yeah. So when we end up thinking, so some of our
global projects and our localprojects, when we try to put
them into context, water is justcritical for life. But it's not
just drinking water is thesometimes is the services out of
water, the fisheries, sometimesit's the inherent value to of
biodiversity. And so we alwaystry in our projects to connect
some fundamental process withinwater to see why it may be
(03:54):
changing or not. Or maybe it'sjust dynamic, it doesn't change
in a bad or good way. It's justaltering because of climate
change or or land usedevelopment. And what we try to
do is pin it to try tounderstand what happens to
societal response. So forexample, when we look at Lake
Tahoe is an excellent example ofthis. We we spent 15 years
(04:16):
trying to understand theinfluence of different types of
invasive species at the lake.
Why study invasive species justto study them? In this case, we
tried to understand what it doesto the water quality of the near
shore of the lake increasedalgal growth. Is there
interactions with him warmingtemperatures? And does that make
stuff at the lake get worse orbetter? And by doing that, then
(04:36):
we connect into thepolicymakers. And through this
new for example, tower ScienceAdvisory Council, we can provide
information to this council andto the managers that are part of
the council to make policychanges that will help improve
Lake Tahoe
Megan Kay (04:52):
and how does wildfire intersect with that.
Sudeep Chandra (04:55):
So wildfire is a great topic to be studying right
now. Not just inherent study ofwhat the well Fire impacts are
but how is the community goingto respond or how's the biology
going to respond in the lake.
And we've had a series of papersnow the last three years, thanks
to our researchers at the GlobalWater Center. And they've been
focusing on not the directeffects of fire, which is what
(05:15):
most of us are accustomed to therunoff from ash and what goes
into water, which is veryimportant. But in this case,
what I call the tele connectiveeffects, the smoke goes up into
the atmosphere, and it can movehundreds to 1000s of miles away.
And as the smoke plume goes intothe atmosphere from a wildfire,
the smoke ash particles andwhere they're deposited can't
(05:36):
and the quality of theseparticles can change. So
something closer to a fire mightbe different. And then something
300 miles away, those smokeparticles might have different
properties. Humans know thisinherently. Because when you
take deep breaths, you knowwhether you're getting kind of
choked out from the wildfire oneday from the smoke and that's
generated, or maybe it's abetter day for air quality and
(05:57):
you can breathe a little easier,while Lake ecosystems and rivers
respond the same way. But whatwe don't have an understanding
is how bad that response can beor how good it good quote
unquote, it might be for theecosystem.
Megan Kay (06:16):
I wanted to take a quick break to talk about the
living with Fire Program. Maybeyou found this podcast and
you're wondering what is theliving with FIRE program? Well,
we've been around since 1997.
We're managed by the Universityof Nevada, Reno extension. And
we're really a collaborativeeffort amongst federal, state
and local firefighting agenciesas well as resource management
agencies to help people adapt,prepare and live more safely
(06:39):
with wildfire. So if you haven'talready, check out our website
living with feiyr.com whereyou'll find all of our resources
and tools that will help youlive more safely with wildfire.
Okay, back to the show.
Sudeep Chandra (06:54):
So I'll give you an example. Lake Tahoe had fires
last year the Dixie and Kaldorfires, there was smoke generated
all around us some of that smokewent north, some of it went
south, some went east west. Butwhen it landed on the lake,
particularly the calendar firesmoke, the the amount of smoke
that landed on the lake was muchhigher towards the south end of
(07:15):
the base and closer to theKaldor fire. And the north end
of the basin were inclinedvillages are my favorite place,
the alibi brewery, the where wehad one of our sampling
locations, the amount of smokethat deposit on the lake was
less compared to the south sideand closer to the fire. So but
if you look at the quality ofthat Ash, our colleague from
(07:37):
Utah State University as acollaborator was able to find
out that the quality of thatsmoke was much lower, meaning
less nitrogen and phosphorus inthat smoke closer to the Kaldor
fire where there was more firewhere there was more deposition
or placement of the ash onto thelake. But if you go to the North
Shore again, incline villagealibi brewery area, there were
(07:58):
less particles deposited but hada lot more nitrogen, phosphorus,
it was super reactive in thelaboratory. So nitrogen is good.
Yeah. And so now why are weworried about nitrogen
phosphorus? Well, it turns outif nitrogen phosphorus is given
at the same at the right ratio,then you grow more algae. That's
one direct effect. And at Tahoe,we're trying to actually control
(08:19):
our algal populations. So justlike Miracle Gro has a nice
combination of nitrogen,phosphorus and potassium to grow
our garden plants. It turns outsmoke has a ratio of nitrogen to
phosphorus. Sometimes it'soptimal. And sometimes it's not.
And so we're able to try toconnect what wildfire smoke
might do for nutrients ofnitrogen phosphorus coming to
the lake to stimulate algae, andthose are the experiments were
(08:42):
running. Now. I will mentionjust one alternative effect. So
that's the fertilization of thelake through the nutrients. The
second one is the smoke, aseveryone knows, when you go in
the West, at least when you getimpacted by Wildfire smoke, you
can't see as far across yourwatershed. You can't see across
the city, you're getting amazingsunsets, but the particles in
(09:04):
the air are thick. Well, thatthickness of particles in the
air from wildfire smoke affectsthe amount of light hitting a
lake. And light is needed forplant growth, or ultraviolet
light in these clear waterlakes, which which actually
kills algal cells, helps controlalgae. And so when you have
smoke in the atmosphere, youmight influence the amount of
(09:24):
ultraviolet light that wascleaning the Lake of algae. But
instead, it reduces theultraviolet light and you might
get more algal growth. And sothere's these these tugs and
pulls between the fertilizationand the light change that might
affect the quality of
Christina Restaino (09:37):
that so incredibly fascinating. Is there
anything mitigation wise thatthat you can do if like, okay,
there's a huge fire like Tahoeis a special protected Lake.
What is there anything that canbe done to counteract that
outgrowth?
Sudeep Chandra (09:52):
Yeah, and so that's a great question. And
often our reaction in society isto figure out like, oh, okay,
now that something's occurring,let's try To fix it, but I tried
to provide this analogy thatit's kinda like when you're,
when you have a heart attack,it's not about fixing the heart
attack immediately, it's moreabout making sure you don't get
the second heart attack. And Ithink for now, there aren't the
(10:14):
technologies of scrubbers andthings that might remove smoke
from the atmosphere or addingthings to a lake that can help
clean it up immediately. So whatwe need to do and what we were
suggesting that we should workon is, rather than having just
watershed protection of LakeTahoe, where the agencies focus
on the watershed itself, becauseof the properties of runoff that
(10:34):
go to the lake, the agenciesshould be broadening their scope
to do regional WildfireProtection hundreds of miles
around the basin. And that wouldallow us to then have buffers
around the amount of wildfiresmoke that can be generated a
couple 100 miles around thebase, and then the quality
that's deposited because
Megan Kay (10:52):
if it's coming from further out, like right now,
there's a fire in Yosemite. Ifit's coming from there, then the
quality of that Ash
Sudeep Chandra (10:59):
might influence us more so then, than if it was
directly next to us.
Christina Restaino (11:03):
So why I missed why exactly that happens.
Why what changes in the chemicalproperty of the smoke as it
moves further away? Yeah,
Sudeep Chandra (11:12):
we're not entirely sure. But what we
suspect is that when burnshappen hot, then they're
actually burning up andtransforming the chemicals
within the ash. So they're putinto the atmosphere and
aerosolized and not in theparticulate. That basically
means that hot burning stuff hasless elements in it. And it's
all been transformed into gasesor other types of, because it's
(11:35):
been like emissions, it'sobliterated, exactly, versus the
stuff that is, the particulatesthat are super fine is the
remnant of that hot burn, stuffthat didn't, that didn't burn,
but it can get because they'refine particles can get
transported much furtherdistances by the atmosphere by
the wind.
Megan Kay (11:53):
Interesting. And then with smoke, is density a thing
like for like when I think aboutlike, a low intensity fire, just
the amount of vegetation that'sconsumed versus high intensity
fire, where you could just belike consuming a bunch of
vegetation at the same time. Sois that something you
Sudeep Chandra (12:09):
know, absolutely, those are sort of
the next steps in this type ofresearch productivity, or
research focus area. So we werefocusing directly on the ash
outputs, taking advantage of thefires, in some ways to try to
understand what the ecosystemimpacts impacts are. But these
would be next case scenario iswe really need to do
collaborative science, withpeople who study the vegetation
(12:30):
and the density of vegetation onlandscape. And as fires move
through how much ash isgenerated, we need collaborators
that study atmospheric physics,to understand how those
particles are actuallytransported and how far they
might go across the landscape ofNevada, or all the way to New
York, in some cases through thejet stream. So so this type of
collaborative science is whatmakes fire science in some ways,
(12:52):
the most exciting of sciences,because it really is going to
involve multiple disciplines.
And we need to ramp up on thatvery quickly. We can't just
wait, I hope we don't just waita generation to get all the
groups together to talk. Thenice thing about, you know,
working with you has been thatwe were on a team meeting last
summer with the National ScienceFoundation, to think about true
collaborative science aroundfire science. And we need to
(13:15):
push that even further in atimely manner where we have all
these disciplines breaking downtheir boundaries. And I think
that's the great time for us inscience right now is just across
those disciplines.
Megan Kay (13:33):
Speaking of wildfire smoke, we actually just put out
a guide called Living withsmoke, how to be prepared for
smoke exposure. In our guide, wetalk about what is in wildfire
smoke, and why it's potentiallyhazardous to your health. We
also talk about how you canprepare for wildfire smoke, and
stay safe indoors and outdoorsduring smoke events. You can
(13:55):
find that guide in the resourcessection of our website at living
with feiyr.com.
Can you like has Is there anyhypothesis that you have is to
you know, how maybe the lake hashandled extreme ash events or
(14:21):
lakes have animals slash events?
Sudeep Chandra (14:23):
So just to clarify, don't get me wrong I
what I'm suggesting is we don'twant to when fires occur, we
don't want to develop tools andtechnologies just like we can
respond to them. That's justhard to do. Right? We need to
treat this thing at just a muchlarger scale because the burns
are big and they're going to becontinuing to continuing to
occur, but kind of in relationto what fire has done to these
(14:45):
aquatic ecosystems in the pastand how important is it? That's
an emerging area of science aswell. That right now in our
paleo scientists are some of thebest scientists on the planet
here at the University ofNevada. My colleague, Paula
noble, for example, has studiedsort of she geologic history of
Lake Tahoe over time, and shecollects cores from Lake Tahoe
(15:05):
or from the lakes in the norththat I described earlier, or are
small mountain lakes. And thenshe can look at changes in the
amount of algal growth in thelake over time, which is an
indicator of water quality. Andwhat we do know not just in
relation to fire, but we doknow, these historic big change
events around climate whichmight lead to fire droughts,
(15:28):
that would change the level ofproductivity in a lake, less
runoff might lead to lessproduction. Some of the cores,
for example, at crater lake thatthey've taken, or that other
other folks have taken, willhave ash in them. So we know
that periodic history and reviewof what those fire events and
(15:50):
frequencies are that affect thelake. What's different about
those studies where you mightsee the effects of regional or
global fires on lakes is you seethem as many perturbations,
meaning many changes in the lakeover time. But the lake comes
back to an equilibrium. Andoften people say, well, the lake
will come back to anequilibrium, right? And you're
(16:12):
like, yes, it does. But thefrequency and the amount of
those fires was far less overthe historical record. And
what's happening today, aseveryone is noticing. Five years
ago, we had a fire four yearsago, we had fires three years
ago, we had fires two years ago,the frequency or the amount,
over a particular period of timeof these fires is increasing a
(16:33):
lot. That is where the hotsciences right now, because
historically, the lake couldrecover because the fires didn't
occur as much. But now yearafter year, you're getting poked
in the in the chest, does yourbody eventually respond
probably, like you get a bruiseeventually, and maybe
eventually, after a bruise, youmight get angry. And then after
(16:55):
getting angry, you might get astroke. And so that analogy is
similar to what we think couldbe happening in like a river
system, smoke comes in one year,smoke comes in the second year,
smoke comes in the third year,after a while a lake can't
purify itself over and overagain.
Christina Restaino (17:10):
We've learned so much in science from
the past and how ecosystems haveresponded to disturbances like
drought or fire, etc. In thepast, but we're we're entering
this new era of no analogexperiences, right? Where were
these ecosystems areexperiencing this right smoke
(17:33):
every single year of fire everysingle year. That's, we don't
have an analog from the past tounderstand that. So yeah, it's
exciting, and it's reallyunknown.
Sudeep Chandra (17:42):
Here's another way to think about it, too, is
it's like, it's exciting andunknown. But we live in a world
full of humans today, comparedto where we had lived in these
systems years and years ago. Sothe question is also, how do we
want our lakes and rivers to be?
And where do we want to manage?
Christina Restaino (17:58):
100%? We don't always need to be thinking
that oh, well in the past, areour ecosystems were in a certain
state? And that's what we alwaysneed to be going for, we need to
be thinking about what's, what'san adapted ecosystem to our
current human needs and wantsfor ecological integrity and
(18:23):
thinking a lot about ecosystemservices, and what are the
ecosystem services that we needfrom our ecosystems and our
lakes and our in our air? And wealways talk about Megan, how
humans are a part of ourecosystems, and they always have
been, and we've always been landtenders and stewards of the land
(18:46):
through 1000s of years. Andcontemporarily, it feels like we
talk a lot about well, humansare over here. And ecosystems
are over here. And ecosystemsneed to be functioning in this
way that is separate fromhumans, because humans are
adulterating those ecosystems.
But we're part of the ecosystemsand so we really need to be
(19:07):
thinking about land managementand policy and decision making
moving forward in the future.
That is really integrating thathuman ecological relationship
and making it on the forefrontof how we're making decisions.
Sudeep Chandra (19:21):
The exciting thing about science today is
that ecological Sciences andNatural Sciences is basically
we're doing science like we'venever done it before. There is
more I'm a pretty upbeat personon science and and humans and
society more than 100 years ago,when you look at the literature
100 years ago from ecology, wewere just studying ecology and
(19:43):
ecosystems. But today, we havesuch opportunities with agencies
that want the information orsocieties that want the
information on science. And so Ithink this integration is a
great time. What you're justpointing out is a great time for
us as scientists to be fullyimmersed into you wanting to use
our information to make betterpolicy and improve our society.
(20:05):
So I'm pretty actually hopeful.
I know fire is a challengingsubject, and so is climate and
drought. But there are also manyopportunities out there. And
scientists and engineers canguide this way forward, if we
cross our boundaries, and if oursociety and communities willing
to listen to the information,absolutely, and
Christina Restaino (20:25):
if we allow room for innovation in
technology and engineering, andthese, you know, more material
sciences, if you will, to helpus come up with adaptive
solutions. And I think that youknow, it's really that
interdisciplinarytransdisciplinary any kind of
(20:46):
term you want to use for it,where we're, you know, working
across different boundaries, inscience in society to really
kind of CO produce these toolsand knowledge sets that that we
can use to solve problems.
Megan Kay (21:05):
Thank you for listening to the living fire
podcast. You can find morestories and resources about
wildfire and our website livingwith feiyr.com The living with
FIRE program is funded by theBureau of Land Management, the
Nevada Division of Forestry andthe US Forest Service, and were
managed by the University ofNevada Reno extension, an equal
opportunity institution.
This is the living with fire podcast brought to you
by the living with Fire Programat the University of Nevada Reno
extension.
Sudeep Chandra (00:20):
And what's happening today, as everyone is
noticing, five years ago, we hada fire four years ago, we had
fires three years ago, we hadfires two years ago, the
frequency or the amount over aparticular period of time of
these fires is increasing a lot.
That is where the hot sciencesright now because historically,
the lake could recover becausethe fires didn't occur as much.
(00:41):
But now year after year, you'regetting poked in the in the
chest. Does your body eventuallyrespond probably.
Megan Kay (00:55):
Hi there, I'm Megan Kay, your host and Outreach
Coordinator for the living fireprogram. And you're listening to
the first episode of season twoof the living with fire podcast.
It's been a while since we'vereleased new episodes, and we're
excited to be back. We've beenbusy this year, traveling all
across the state of Nevada,working with communities and
educating folks about how toprepare for wildfire. We've also
(01:19):
been working on some new andexciting projects, which we'll
tell you more about later on thepodcast. So with these episodes
that we're putting out in 2022,we really wanted to focus on
aspects of living with fire thatare maybe not always visible,
that are unseen. And so thatmade us think about wildfire
(01:41):
smoke and its impacts not onlyon health, but ecosystems. You
just heard from Professor SudeepChandra
Sudeep Chandra (01:48):
Sudeep Chandra at the University of Nevada,
Reno, I'm a professor in thebiology department and I direct
the University's Global WaterCenter and the Aspen Institute
for Global Studies.
Megan Kay (01:58):
So last August, August 2021, when the Kaldor
fire was burning and threateningLake Tahoe, I became aware of
some research that the GlobalWater Center was doing about
wildfire smoke and its effect onLake Tahoe. So I kind of filed
that away in my memory. And whenwe were putting together topics
(02:18):
for this season of the podcast,I really wanted to get to talk
to Professor Chandra about thatresearch. We're also joined by
Dr. Kristina Rossano, thedirector of the living with FIRE
program, I'm so glad she wasonly interview she offered a lot
of insight was able to kind ofexpand on some topics. So enjoy
that conversation and enjoy thisepisode. Thanks.
(02:46):
So how long have you been withyou? And
Sudeep Chandra (02:49):
yeah, so I've been here at the University of
Nevada, for 16 years, I had alittle stint where I left for a
little bit to go to Washington,DC, but then came back. And most
of my work involves these kindof interconnectedness of trying
to understand water systems,whether rivers or lakes as a as
a limnology list and what thatmeans for society. But then we
(03:12):
do some basic research on theinfluence of climate or
wildfires on lakes. So it'ssomewhat societal, but it's also
just kind of what happens tonatural biodiversity or the
functioning of ecosystems. So
Megan Kay (03:24):
So what have you can I just want to back up real
quick and describe not juststudying water and biodiversity
but water in people?
Sudeep Chandra (03:31):
Yeah. So when we end up thinking, so some of our
global projects and our localprojects, when we try to put
them into context, water is justcritical for life. But it's not
just drinking water is thesometimes is the services out of
water, the fisheries, sometimesit's the inherent value to of
biodiversity. And so we alwaystry in our projects to connect
some fundamental process withinwater to see why it may be
(03:54):
changing or not. Or maybe it'sjust dynamic, it doesn't change
in a bad or good way. It's justaltering because of climate
change or or land usedevelopment. And what we try to
do is pin it to try tounderstand what happens to
societal response. So forexample, when we look at Lake
Tahoe is an excellent example ofthis. We we spent 15 years
(04:16):
trying to understand theinfluence of different types of
invasive species at the lake.
Why study invasive species justto study them? In this case, we
tried to understand what it doesto the water quality of the near
shore of the lake increasedalgal growth. Is there
interactions with him warmingtemperatures? And does that make
stuff at the lake get worse orbetter? And by doing that, then
(04:36):
we connect into thepolicymakers. And through this
new for example, tower ScienceAdvisory Council, we can provide
information to this council andto the managers that are part of
the council to make policychanges that will help improve
Lake Tahoe
Megan Kay (04:52):
and how does wildfire intersect with that.
Sudeep Chandra (04:55):
So wildfire is a great topic to be studying right
now. Not just inherent study ofwhat the well Fire impacts are
but how is the community goingto respond or how's the biology
going to respond in the lake.
And we've had a series of papersnow the last three years, thanks
to our researchers at the GlobalWater Center. And they've been
focusing on not the directeffects of fire, which is what
(05:15):
most of us are accustomed to therunoff from ash and what goes
into water, which is veryimportant. But in this case,
what I call the tele connectiveeffects, the smoke goes up into
the atmosphere, and it can movehundreds to 1000s of miles away.
And as the smoke plume goes intothe atmosphere from a wildfire,
the smoke ash particles andwhere they're deposited can't
(05:36):
and the quality of theseparticles can change. So
something closer to a fire mightbe different. And then something
300 miles away, those smokeparticles might have different
properties. Humans know thisinherently. Because when you
take deep breaths, you knowwhether you're getting kind of
choked out from the wildfire oneday from the smoke and that's
generated, or maybe it's abetter day for air quality and
(05:57):
you can breathe a little easier,while Lake ecosystems and rivers
respond the same way. But whatwe don't have an understanding
is how bad that response can beor how good it good quote
unquote, it might be for theecosystem.
Megan Kay (06:16):
I wanted to take a quick break to talk about the
living with Fire Program. Maybeyou found this podcast and
you're wondering what is theliving with FIRE program? Well,
we've been around since 1997.
We're managed by the Universityof Nevada, Reno extension. And
we're really a collaborativeeffort amongst federal, state
and local firefighting agenciesas well as resource management
agencies to help people adapt,prepare and live more safely
(06:39):
with wildfire. So if you haven'talready, check out our website
living with feiyr.com whereyou'll find all of our resources
and tools that will help youlive more safely with wildfire.
Okay, back to the show.
Sudeep Chandra (06:54):
So I'll give you an example. Lake Tahoe had fires
last year the Dixie and Kaldorfires, there was smoke generated
all around us some of that smokewent north, some of it went
south, some went east west. Butwhen it landed on the lake,
particularly the calendar firesmoke, the the amount of smoke
that landed on the lake was muchhigher towards the south end of
(07:15):
the base and closer to theKaldor fire. And the north end
of the basin were inclinedvillages are my favorite place,
the alibi brewery, the where wehad one of our sampling
locations, the amount of smokethat deposit on the lake was
less compared to the south sideand closer to the fire. So but
if you look at the quality ofthat Ash, our colleague from
(07:37):
Utah State University as acollaborator was able to find
out that the quality of thatsmoke was much lower, meaning
less nitrogen and phosphorus inthat smoke closer to the Kaldor
fire where there was more firewhere there was more deposition
or placement of the ash onto thelake. But if you go to the North
Shore again, incline villagealibi brewery area, there were
(07:58):
less particles deposited but hada lot more nitrogen, phosphorus,
it was super reactive in thelaboratory. So nitrogen is good.
Yeah. And so now why are weworried about nitrogen
phosphorus? Well, it turns outif nitrogen phosphorus is given
at the same at the right ratio,then you grow more algae. That's
one direct effect. And at Tahoe,we're trying to actually control
(08:19):
our algal populations. So justlike Miracle Gro has a nice
combination of nitrogen,phosphorus and potassium to grow
our garden plants. It turns outsmoke has a ratio of nitrogen to
phosphorus. Sometimes it'soptimal. And sometimes it's not.
And so we're able to try toconnect what wildfire smoke
might do for nutrients ofnitrogen phosphorus coming to
the lake to stimulate algae, andthose are the experiments were
(08:42):
running. Now. I will mentionjust one alternative effect. So
that's the fertilization of thelake through the nutrients. The
second one is the smoke, aseveryone knows, when you go in
the West, at least when you getimpacted by Wildfire smoke, you
can't see as far across yourwatershed. You can't see across
the city, you're getting amazingsunsets, but the particles in
(09:04):
the air are thick. Well, thatthickness of particles in the
air from wildfire smoke affectsthe amount of light hitting a
lake. And light is needed forplant growth, or ultraviolet
light in these clear waterlakes, which which actually
kills algal cells, helps controlalgae. And so when you have
smoke in the atmosphere, youmight influence the amount of
(09:24):
ultraviolet light that wascleaning the Lake of algae. But
instead, it reduces theultraviolet light and you might
get more algal growth. And sothere's these these tugs and
pulls between the fertilizationand the light change that might
affect the quality of
Christina Restaino (09:37):
that so incredibly fascinating. Is there
anything mitigation wise thatthat you can do if like, okay,
there's a huge fire like Tahoeis a special protected Lake.
What is there anything that canbe done to counteract that
outgrowth?
Sudeep Chandra (09:52):
Yeah, and so that's a great question. And
often our reaction in society isto figure out like, oh, okay,
now that something's occurring,let's try To fix it, but I tried
to provide this analogy thatit's kinda like when you're,
when you have a heart attack,it's not about fixing the heart
attack immediately, it's moreabout making sure you don't get
the second heart attack. And Ithink for now, there aren't the
(10:14):
technologies of scrubbers andthings that might remove smoke
from the atmosphere or addingthings to a lake that can help
clean it up immediately. So whatwe need to do and what we were
suggesting that we should workon is, rather than having just
watershed protection of LakeTahoe, where the agencies focus
on the watershed itself, becauseof the properties of runoff that
(10:34):
go to the lake, the agenciesshould be broadening their scope
to do regional WildfireProtection hundreds of miles
around the basin. And that wouldallow us to then have buffers
around the amount of wildfiresmoke that can be generated a
couple 100 miles around thebase, and then the quality
that's deposited because
Megan Kay (10:52):
if it's coming from further out, like right now,
there's a fire in Yosemite. Ifit's coming from there, then the
quality of that Ash
Sudeep Chandra (10:59):
might influence us more so then, than if it was
directly next to us.
Christina Restaino (11:03):
So why I missed why exactly that happens.
Why what changes in the chemicalproperty of the smoke as it
moves further away? Yeah,
Sudeep Chandra (11:12):
we're not entirely sure. But what we
suspect is that when burnshappen hot, then they're
actually burning up andtransforming the chemicals
within the ash. So they're putinto the atmosphere and
aerosolized and not in theparticulate. That basically
means that hot burning stuff hasless elements in it. And it's
all been transformed into gasesor other types of, because it's
(11:35):
been like emissions, it'sobliterated, exactly, versus the
stuff that is, the particulatesthat are super fine is the
remnant of that hot burn, stuffthat didn't, that didn't burn,
but it can get because they'refine particles can get
transported much furtherdistances by the atmosphere by
the wind.
Megan Kay (11:53):
Interesting. And then with smoke, is density a thing
like for like when I think aboutlike, a low intensity fire, just
the amount of vegetation that'sconsumed versus high intensity
fire, where you could just belike consuming a bunch of
vegetation at the same time. Sois that something you
Sudeep Chandra (12:09):
know, absolutely, those are sort of
the next steps in this type ofresearch productivity, or
research focus area. So we werefocusing directly on the ash
outputs, taking advantage of thefires, in some ways to try to
understand what the ecosystemimpacts impacts are. But these
would be next case scenario iswe really need to do
collaborative science, withpeople who study the vegetation
(12:30):
and the density of vegetation onlandscape. And as fires move
through how much ash isgenerated, we need collaborators
that study atmospheric physics,to understand how those
particles are actuallytransported and how far they
might go across the landscape ofNevada, or all the way to New
York, in some cases through thejet stream. So so this type of
collaborative science is whatmakes fire science in some ways,
(12:52):
the most exciting of sciences,because it really is going to
involve multiple disciplines.
And we need to ramp up on thatvery quickly. We can't just
wait, I hope we don't just waita generation to get all the
groups together to talk. Thenice thing about, you know,
working with you has been thatwe were on a team meeting last
summer with the National ScienceFoundation, to think about true
collaborative science aroundfire science. And we need to
(13:15):
push that even further in atimely manner where we have all
these disciplines breaking downtheir boundaries. And I think
that's the great time for us inscience right now is just across
those disciplines.
Megan Kay (13:33):
Speaking of wildfire smoke, we actually just put out
a guide called Living withsmoke, how to be prepared for
smoke exposure. In our guide, wetalk about what is in wildfire
smoke, and why it's potentiallyhazardous to your health. We
also talk about how you canprepare for wildfire smoke, and
stay safe indoors and outdoorsduring smoke events. You can
(13:55):
find that guide in the resourcessection of our website at living
with feiyr.com.
Can you like has Is there anyhypothesis that you have is to
you know, how maybe the lake hashandled extreme ash events or
(14:21):
lakes have animals slash events?
Sudeep Chandra (14:23):
So just to clarify, don't get me wrong I
what I'm suggesting is we don'twant to when fires occur, we
don't want to develop tools andtechnologies just like we can
respond to them. That's justhard to do. Right? We need to
treat this thing at just a muchlarger scale because the burns
are big and they're going to becontinuing to continuing to
occur, but kind of in relationto what fire has done to these
(14:45):
aquatic ecosystems in the pastand how important is it? That's
an emerging area of science aswell. That right now in our
paleo scientists are some of thebest scientists on the planet
here at the University ofNevada. My colleague, Paula
noble, for example, has studiedsort of she geologic history of
Lake Tahoe over time, and shecollects cores from Lake Tahoe
(15:05):
or from the lakes in the norththat I described earlier, or are
small mountain lakes. And thenshe can look at changes in the
amount of algal growth in thelake over time, which is an
indicator of water quality. Andwhat we do know not just in
relation to fire, but we doknow, these historic big change
events around climate whichmight lead to fire droughts,
(15:28):
that would change the level ofproductivity in a lake, less
runoff might lead to lessproduction. Some of the cores,
for example, at crater lake thatthey've taken, or that other
other folks have taken, willhave ash in them. So we know
that periodic history and reviewof what those fire events and
(15:50):
frequencies are that affect thelake. What's different about
those studies where you mightsee the effects of regional or
global fires on lakes is you seethem as many perturbations,
meaning many changes in the lakeover time. But the lake comes
back to an equilibrium. Andoften people say, well, the lake
will come back to anequilibrium, right? And you're
(16:12):
like, yes, it does. But thefrequency and the amount of
those fires was far less overthe historical record. And
what's happening today, aseveryone is noticing. Five years
ago, we had a fire four yearsago, we had fires three years
ago, we had fires two years ago,the frequency or the amount,
over a particular period of timeof these fires is increasing a
(16:33):
lot. That is where the hotsciences right now, because
historically, the lake couldrecover because the fires didn't
occur as much. But now yearafter year, you're getting poked
in the in the chest, does yourbody eventually respond
probably, like you get a bruiseeventually, and maybe
eventually, after a bruise, youmight get angry. And then after
(16:55):
getting angry, you might get astroke. And so that analogy is
similar to what we think couldbe happening in like a river
system, smoke comes in one year,smoke comes in the second year,
smoke comes in the third year,after a while a lake can't
purify itself over and overagain.
Christina Restaino (17:10):
We've learned so much in science from
the past and how ecosystems haveresponded to disturbances like
drought or fire, etc. In thepast, but we're we're entering
this new era of no analogexperiences, right? Where were
these ecosystems areexperiencing this right smoke
(17:33):
every single year of fire everysingle year. That's, we don't
have an analog from the past tounderstand that. So yeah, it's
exciting, and it's reallyunknown.
Sudeep Chandra (17:42):
Here's another way to think about it, too, is
it's like, it's exciting andunknown. But we live in a world
full of humans today, comparedto where we had lived in these
systems years and years ago. Sothe question is also, how do we
want our lakes and rivers to be?
And where do we want to manage?
Christina Restaino (17:58):
100%? We don't always need to be thinking
that oh, well in the past, areour ecosystems were in a certain
state? And that's what we alwaysneed to be going for, we need to
be thinking about what's, what'san adapted ecosystem to our
current human needs and wantsfor ecological integrity and
(18:23):
thinking a lot about ecosystemservices, and what are the
ecosystem services that we needfrom our ecosystems and our
lakes and our in our air? And wealways talk about Megan, how
humans are a part of ourecosystems, and they always have
been, and we've always been landtenders and stewards of the land
(18:46):
through 1000s of years. Andcontemporarily, it feels like we
talk a lot about well, humansare over here. And ecosystems
are over here. And ecosystemsneed to be functioning in this
way that is separate fromhumans, because humans are
adulterating those ecosystems.
But we're part of the ecosystemsand so we really need to be
(19:07):
thinking about land managementand policy and decision making
moving forward in the future.
That is really integrating thathuman ecological relationship
and making it on the forefrontof how we're making decisions.
Sudeep Chandra (19:21):
The exciting thing about science today is
that ecological Sciences andNatural Sciences is basically
we're doing science like we'venever done it before. There is
more I'm a pretty upbeat personon science and and humans and
society more than 100 years ago,when you look at the literature
100 years ago from ecology, wewere just studying ecology and
(19:43):
ecosystems. But today, we havesuch opportunities with agencies
that want the information orsocieties that want the
information on science. And so Ithink this integration is a
great time. What you're justpointing out is a great time for
us as scientists to be fullyimmersed into you wanting to use
our information to make betterpolicy and improve our society.
(20:05):
So I'm pretty actually hopeful.
I know fire is a challengingsubject, and so is climate and
drought. But there are also manyopportunities out there. And
scientists and engineers canguide this way forward, if we
cross our boundaries, and if oursociety and communities willing
to listen to the information,absolutely, and
Christina Restaino (20:25):
if we allow room for innovation in
technology and engineering, andthese, you know, more material
sciences, if you will, to helpus come up with adaptive
solutions. And I think that youknow, it's really that
interdisciplinarytransdisciplinary any kind of
(20:46):
term you want to use for it,where we're, you know, working
across different boundaries, inscience in society to really
kind of CO produce these toolsand knowledge sets that that we
can use to solve problems.
Megan Kay (21:05):
Thank you for listening to the living fire
podcast. You can find morestories and resources about
wildfire and our website livingwith feiyr.com The living with
FIRE program is funded by theBureau of Land Management, the
Nevada Division of Forestry andthe US Forest Service, and were
managed by the University ofNevada Reno extension, an equal
opportunity institution.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.