As California battles yet another wave of wildfires, with flames now licking the edges of major highways like the I-5 and Highway 101, the state’s emergency services are struggling to contain the destruction. These fires, fuelled by months of drought and record-breaking heat, are a stark reminder of the accelerating climate crisis. But amid the chaos, a surprising source of insight is emerging: the United Kingdom’s approach to climate resilience.
The fires, which began on Tuesday afternoon, have already consumed thousands of acres, forcing evacuations and closing key transport routes. The combination of parched vegetation, strong Santa Ana winds, and temperatures exceeding 40°C has created a perfect storm. For those of us who follow the data, this is not an anomaly. It is a trend line on a graph that has been climbing for decades. The atmospheric conditions driving these fires are consistent with a world that has warmed by 1.2°C above pre-industrial levels.
But while California’s firefighters deploy aircraft and ground crews in a desperate race against time, a different battle is being fought in the United Kingdom. There, climate resilience is not just about responding to disasters, but about preventing them. The British government’s Climate Resilience Programme, launched in 2021, focuses on infrastructure adaptation, land management, and community preparedness. Key measures include retrofitting buildings to withstand extreme heat, creating wildland-urban interfaces, and investing in early warning systems.
One example is the UK’s approach to railway infrastructure. During the 2022 heatwave, which saw temperatures exceed 40°C for the first time, Network Rail implemented a system of speed restrictions and proactive track inspections. This prevented any major derailments. In California, however, the rail network remains vulnerable. The Union Pacific and BNSF railways, which carry critical freight through the fire zones, have no such protocols. The result is that wildfires frequently disrupt supply chains, costing billions.
Another lesson lies in land management. The UK has a long history of controlled burns and livestock grazing to reduce fuel loads. This is a practice that California has only recently begun to adopt on a meaningful scale. But the scale of the problem is vast. California’s wildlands are so overgrown that even with increased controlled burns, the state would need decades to catch up. The UK, with its smaller land mass and different fire regime, offers a blueprint but not a complete solution.
Perhaps the most important lesson is in community resilience. British local authorities have established extensive networks of emergency volunteers, many of whom are trained in first aid and fire management. In California, the reliance on professional firefighters and law enforcement means that when fires overwhelm these resources, communities are left isolated. The UK’s ‘street warden’ schemes, which mobilise residents to check on vulnerable neighbours during heatwaves, are a low-cost way to save lives.
But there is a deeper issue: the UK’s climate resilience is built on a foundation of accurate data and long-term planning. The Met Office’s climate projections are integrated into planning decisions, from housing estates to transport hubs. California, by contrast, has a fragmented approach. Local governments often approve developments in high-fire-risk zones, ignoring the data. The result is a patchwork of vulnerabilities.
As the fires continue to rage, it is clear that California must move beyond the cycle of crisis and response. The UK’s example shows that resilience is not a luxury. It is a necessity. The cost of inaction is measured not just in dollars, but in lives lost, homes destroyed, and ecosystems ravaged.
The flames along the I-5 are a warning. They are a sign that our current trajectory is unsustainable. The question is not whether we can afford to adapt, but whether we can afford not to. The answer is clear, and it is urgent. The UK has shown the way. Now California must follow.
