 Now, thanks so much everyone for coming. Good afternoon and welcome to VEG 21, which of course is this year's virtual annual meeting of the European Geosciences Union. This year we have more than 14,000 abstracts and about 16,000 researchers from around the globe participating. I'm Terry Cook and I'm EG's Head of Media Communications and Outreach and I'll be hosting today's press conference and it will include a question and answer period after the presentations by our speakers. To allow for you, the members of the media to ask your own questions, we're conducting this as a Zoom meeting. And so once the last speaker has finished, you're welcome to either type your question into the chat or put a queue and then I'll call on you and you'll be able to ask your question directly. If for any reason Zoom suddenly quits, I'll restart the press conference and just give everyone a few minutes to rejoin the session, but hopefully that will not happen. Just wanted to let you all know that the abstracts and other documents relating to this press conference and all of the other ones as well have been uploaded onto the document section of our online press center and you can access that using the website, media. egu.eu. And so please check there for more information and also for images. So it's my honor now to introduce our panelists and I'm going to introduce all of them at once just to make for faster transitions in between. So this press conference is recent wildfire research, understanding impact, assessing risk and reducing hazard. And I'm not sure why I haven't heard from Benedetto de Rosa, he's not able to join us. If he does come in late then he'll be the last speaker, but he would be more than happy to answer questions by email, and I can provide that. So our first speaker today will be Bruno Paricio from the University of Lisbon. We have a pre recorded presentation next from Dirk Thielen who's from the Venezuelan Institute for scientific research. He's also joined us. His internet connection is fluctuating but he will hopefully be able to answer questions in the chat at least and is more than happy to answer questions by email as well. And then we will also hear from Samuel Lucy, who's from ETA to Zurich. So thank you very much. And I will now hand things over to Dr. Paricio. Thank you, Terry. I'll start sharing my screen. Okay, so my name is Bruno Paricio. I'm a PhD students at Forest Research Center at University of Lisbon. And I'll be talking about our work in combining wildfire behavior simulations and complex network theory to support field management. This work was supported by Anna Sa, Francisco Santos, Chiara Bruni and Jose Pereira. And before starting I would like to thank Terry for the invitation to be here today. And if after this session you find, if you find yourselves with questions or doubts, please feel free to contact me. So this is a question that we often have in mind. So can science help decision makers to reduce large wildfires. And before, before starting to explain how can we do this. We need to understand the relevance of this question and the relevance of the answer. So the answer is yes, we can help decision makers. And this is relevant because the number of wildfires in Europe is decreasing, but inter-annual variability is increasing. This means that bad fire seasons are becoming worse and worse. So we are experiencing more intense wildfires that are more difficult to suppress and have more severe consequences. This is due to a large set of reasons, but the main reason is the abandonment of the countryside, which leads to fuel accumulation and in turn, basically transform our landscape, the European landscape, into a prone landscape for large wildfires. So what is our contribution? Basically, there are many ways to study wildfires. And one method that it's currently used is to use models to simulate fire behavior. The problem is that these, the models outputs are very often, they are often very specific, which make them difficult to communicate with decision makers. So what we did was to use complex network theory to interpret the models outputs. So let us start with the basic. What is a network? A network is basically a set of different nodes and links that are connecting our network. So what we did was to run the wildfire simulations. We stored the outputs regarding wildfire behavior. And then on top of those outputs, we generated the network. So imagine that we have a landscape. Here it's represented by squares and rectangles where each square represents a unique patch or a unique parcel of lands. And on top of that, we generated the centrites, the nodes that are connected to all of its neighbors by links. Okay, so we have now a network that is very similar to the original landscape. So because now we have a network, we can actually implement and use different metrics to study the network. So we used this, this metric called giant components to understand what is the largest extent of area that has the potential to burn with few opportunities for ground base suppression. So we know that above a given threshold of fire intensity, ground based suppression will have a low effectiveness. So what we did was to account for all of the continuous area above this given threshold to quantify what is the largest extent of area where we basically have just a few opportunities for ground based suppression. And then we also generated a new metric called directional index of wildfire connectivity that basically allows us to identify the most important areas for connectivity. The way that this metric works is that not only is important the intensity that each parcel, each node in the landscape can burn, but also where that patch or that parcel is located in the landscape. Okay, so in this example, we have this particular parcel that burns at the high intensity, but because it is located in an area where its neighbors also burn at the high intensity, then we say that this is a particular, a particular area of interest under this metric. So how can we help. We applied this metrics to the Serret Moschik, located in southern Portugal, Serret Moschik is a Mediterranean area, very prone to large wildfires. And because of that, in the past, it was suggested the implementation of this fuel break network. So this solid black lines that we see that you see here is the entire fuel break, which is composed by 3500 actors. So we can imagine a fuel break to be something similar to this. So we have a forest, and in between we have this fuel break that basically breaks the continuity of the forest. Let me just say that this fuel break network was never implemented. Okay. So because it was never implemented, we asked ourselves, can we actually identify some of the priority fuel breaks to implement. So we applied those metrics that I just present to you. And actually, we can indeed identify some some priority areas. So here under the giant components, which basically tells us which is, and where it is located the largest area where we don't have opportunities for ground based suppression. We see that these two particular fuel breaks are the most important in the entire network. And when we take into perspective the directional index of wildfire connectivity, which basically tells us where are the parcels the areas that are more prone to spread a wildfire in the landscape. And we see that we basically have four different fuel breaks that are top priority. In the more detailed way, when we look at the landscape in a more reactive perspective to break up the largest area with few opportunities for ground based suppression. We basically need to fuel breaks of around 300 actor actors to basically reduce this metric by 50%. When we take a more preventive perspective of the landscape, basically to stop or to limit the wildfire, the wildfire spreading in the landscape, we basically need for fuel breaks of almost 600 actors to reduce this metric in 40%. So basically what I'm trying to say is that we don't need to implement the whole 3,500 fuel break network to have a meaningful impact in reducing the hazards in the landscape. So, take home messages. We do have the tools to identify priority areas for fuel reduction. And the fact that our recommendations are often overlooked is also political decision and I like to add on that is more and more a political decision, rather than a technological limitation on our sides. The second take home messages is that is that the use of graph based tools in wildfire research allows to further reduce uncertainty since we are looking at the landscape in a different perspective, which will contribute to manage wildfire risk more efficiently. So, thank you for your attention and I'm looking forward to your questions. Thank you so much. Thank you. So for the next presentation is pre recorded. This sound is a little bit faint. And so I'll play it through the sounds set on maximum right now. But if anyone would like me to send them the presentation so you can play it on your own computer. I'm happy to do that afterwards. Please just email me. Good afternoon. My name is to feel. I'm head of the laboratory of landscape ecology and climate from the Venezuelan Institute for scientific research. On behalf of my colleagues, we want to thank you for your interest in this presentation and your interest in our research, which deals with Pantanal's historical drought that extreme drought that's currently affecting the Pantanal. Let us remember the Pantanal is the largest wetland in the world. And together with the Amazonas and Serrado represents one of the most important biodiversity hotspots, not only Brazil, but in South America. Now, because this ongoing extreme drought affecting the Pantanal, unprecedented fires have occurred, affecting, directly affecting and severely affecting over 30% of its extension. We are, in the present research, we are concerned about some key issues such as evolution. Evolution regarding dynamics on temporal and spatial dynamics, also very important contribution we're making with this research is identifying the causes, the determinants that make such a drought so severe, so prolonged, and using that evidence for forecasting, not only the current drought, but also the potentiality of occurring future extreme events affecting the ecosystem functioning of this important wetland. Now, these two sets of figures give us information about what has been the evolution, the time and space dynamics of the drought. We can see that drought started already in 2019 and since March 2020 until present, the over 70% of the area of the Pantanal has been, has had a sustained extremely, extremely dry condition. We can see that, appreciate that better here in this graph, and also very important, we can see here that even though we are ending a rainy season, such as this one here, we are starting a dry season with an extremely dry condition. With showing a very important deficit in precipitation. As mentioned, another key issue we are very interested is identifying the determinants of this variability, this precipitation variability in the Pantanal area, such as the occurrence of these dry poses, and very specifically this current drought that's affecting the Pantanal. For this, we established correlations between monthly precipitation and sea surface temperature. From this exercise, we identified eight specific oceanic regions, five in the southern hemisphere, which have very strong and very positive correlation with precipitation dynamics here, meaning that the warming in these oceanic regions would result in wet pulses, as we can see here. We would be explaining the presence of these wet pulses, while in the northern hemisphere we identified three specific oceanic regions with also very strong correlation, but negative with precipitations here in the Pantanal, meaning that the warming in one or more of these oceanic regions would be negative correlated with the presence of triposes, occurrence of important dry and extended triposes in the Pantanal area. Now, a significant trend in warming has been identified for these three oceanic regions, which have been correlated negatively with precipitations in the Pantanal. And this trend is more important here, specifically here in the northeast Pacific in this region. As we can see here, this specific region explains almost 86% of the happening of this very important current drought affecting the Pantanal area. Now, this significant trend in the warming of waters here in northeast Pacific has generated a marine heatwave condition since June 2019 and for almost constantly until present. Here we have it in red. This marine heatwave is defined as when sea surface temperature surpasses 90th percentile. Now, this is not only a new concept, it is also a new climatic reality. There is a lot of research, a lot of concern about the dynamics, the recent dynamics of this phenomenon. There is some researchers have forecasted, here we can see that it is indeed a recent phenomenon, but they are forecasting in the short term for an increase, not only in the duration of marine heatwaves in different oceanic regions, which would increase. This includes the ones we are concerned, but also for an intensification of such events. Results from this research show that precipitations at the Pantanal area are most sensitive to the dynamics and presence of marine heatwaves in certain oceanic regions. For example, the current extreme drought affecting the Pantanal can be explained by the presence of a very prolonged and very intense marine heatwave here in northeast Pacific. Currently, there is a trend, a very significant trend for warming of these three specific oceanic regions, which were established to have a high correlation with the occurrence of triposes and droughts in the Pantanal area. From this evidence, we can forecast for the Pantanal area an increase in the trend for an extremely dry condition in the Pantanal area, as well an extension in such a trend, at least for two more years. Now, this marine heatwave situation, there is a forecast for an extension in its duration, as well as an intensification. This most certainly would generate a new climate reality, very difficult if not impossible for the Pantanal to over. I want to stop here and thank you again for your interest in this topic and remind you I am completely available for any further questions or inquiries you may have regarding this investigation. Thank you very much. Thank you, Eric, for sending that in. And again, if you were not able to hear the sound very clearly, please just send me an email and I'd be happy to share that. And at the end there, he emphasized that he's happy to answer questions by email, if he's not able to join us later on for the Q&A period. So we'll now turn to Dr. Samuel Luthi from ETH Zurich. Thank you so much. All right. Hello, everybody. Do you see my slides? Presentation mode. Fantastic. So yeah, hello also from my side. My name is Samuel Luthi. I'm a PhD student here at DTH here in Zurich. And thanks a lot also from my side to Terry for the invitation to talk at this press conference. I get the chance to present to you what we've been working on over the past year on economic damages or wildfires, and that's work that I obviously haven't done alone. My name is Dr. Gabriella Snarsigwan. My professor, David Bresch, who are very much involved, but also I'm in many other of the whole veteran climate risk group here in our team as obviously research is quite often a team effort and chat over coffee sometimes as important as a concrete input in a meeting. So what we do generally here with the veteran climate risk group is we try to estimate impacts and model impacts of natural disasters or of climate extremes. And we look at often at infrastructure damages, so at the US dollar, but also at, for example, how people are getting displaced under flooding, etc. So this this trait of research is actually only very recently in an academic trade for a long time it used to be within the rather within the insurance industry so rather within the private sector, where we insurers or insurers tried to model impacts of typically of large natural hazards as hurricanes, tropical cyclones, earthquakes, flooding, etc. To price their policies, accordingly. Obviously, they, they had a focus on on the richer regions of this world, where the biggest losses would come up so there was the focus was very much on on the US, on Japan on Australia, or also in Europe, and also mainly on on hurricanes or on earthquakes. Relatively little attention to to economic impacts of wildfires. And that's also, I mean, if you look at at the figures and that's a Swiss tree who published those that in the time period from the 1980s to 2015. Like insured losses from from wildfires were only two percentage of the whole losses of the industry. And this number has gone crazily up to 12 percentage in the last five years so in the periods 2016 to 2020 so up to percentage to 12 percentage. And obviously that brought a lot of attention to the topic and and the insurance industries now all over it so they're publishing reports etc. And also more and more. As we see that that more and more investors in the financial world want to have a look, want to know the climate risks of what they're investing in they also keep asking this question, are you exposed to this sort of natural catastrophe to climate risk. And so now insurance also started modeling wildfire slowly, but obviously what they do is they have the proprietary models focusing on the very rich regions of the world. That is a bit different to what we do here at the weather climate risk group, as we want to be open source open data open access so that that everybody can work with our model and that we only rely on data that is available for free and publicly available. So we also work a lot with NGOs as the World Bank so people that want to have an idea of disaster risk for for specific countries, and her word. So, when we try to model impacts of natural catastrophes than as nearly with any modeling, you basically need to perform two tasks. The first one, more or less being able to explain what happened in the past. And the second one, what could happen. So what is the risk what is in the system. So the concept of of how we go about this of how we model climate risk is that we see that risk hinges on these three components and that's a definition put forward by the IPCC so the governmental intergovernmental panel on climate change. These have these three components hazard exposure and vulnerability. The hazard is basically anything nature frozen user that in our case that's wildfires but that can also be storm flood etc etc. And exposure is the variable that you want to look at so that can be infrastructure houses can be people. So the ability is basically then how your exposure react to a hazard. So if you have a house that is very well isolated that doesn't burn that easy has a lower vulnerability as compared to a stable filled with hate. And as I said, we work with open data and globally consistently. Here, just to illustrate that we have that data available for the whole world, but I'll focus on impacts of the wildfire last that occurred last year in Australia to have a bit of a better grasp on example. And so what we did for the hazard is, we use the satellite data on fire which is made available, NASA, NASA mission, it's called modest mission. We use their data that we know at what time and where a fire of what intensity occurred. And then we overlap that with our exposure layer or exposure layer here is generated using light and night light intensity. So that the buildings glow in the night so we have a rough idea where what infrastructure is. We overlap these two to grids or these two maps and can calculate using some vulnerability aspects, economic impacts, especially the spatially aggregated. That's very important to do that obviously spatially explicit. Sometimes, you probably don't see it on the slide, there's a relatively small dot in Melbourne, which caused a lot of damages because there's a lot of infrastructure, while these mega fires here didn't cause as much economic damages, because they're simply not as much infrastructure as close to a city in the wildfire in urban, yeah, interface. Obviously, that's other impacts that occurred there, biological carbon impacts, but we don't look at these now so it's, I wouldn't want to say these fires are not important is just for that case. So that's how we look at past impacts, and if you want to look at what could happen, then we have this way of generating or simulating fires. So we do that relatively easy that we can do it everywhere in the globe that we don't depend on too much data. And so it's basically we have this random random walk algorithm where we started the random point, and then we let that fire grow, depending on some properties that we can give to the map. And so we simulate a couple thousand, 10,000 fires like that. And then we sample from those to what we call simulated fire season so we try to generate fire season and it's actually coincidence that it's Portugal but probably nice. So on the left you see historic fire season so what happened in the past, and then we have roughly 20 years of satellite data, and obviously that is not enough to have a proper impact assessment. So we try to generate the couple hundred thousand of these fire seasons to see what what what is in there. So I would very much give you a number of the actual climate change risk. But this is very hard to come up but the current time or would not dare yet, because there's so many driving factors, and because if we only look at past data, we are going to underestimate quite heavily as we see there's such a strong trend in wildfire risk. So that's probably a bit part of the story that we see here generally going on, that it's already hard to simulate damages from from natural hazards. It's already hard with with the climate crisis with this extreme shift. It's gotten increasingly increasingly harder to figure out what risk we're actually are in. So that that is definitely something to be very concerned about that we are, if you're looking at natural catastrophes that we're, we need to, yeah, that we're going into rough uncertainties. Yeah, I think that's from my side I'm happy to take on a question later here are some come contact details, and yeah, happy to discuss it. Sorry for being a bit long. I'd be happy to open up to questions. Right now, Dr. Dylan is in the room, virtual room here. So, we could ask questions at least through the chat of him, as well as Dr. operation and Samuel Lucy, people are debating what they'd like to ask. I actually had a question about the first presentation. And so I wanted to actually ask you, you mentioned that it's, there's a scientific process. Dr operation and you mentioned that there's also a political process and presumably there's also a budgetary process as well that goes into those fire breaks. So I'm curious, have you had personal experience, you know, interacting between all those realms. And what do you also think that scientists can do it and advocate so that the best possible science is used when those decisions are made. I have a question. I, we haven't made a formal contact with the decision makers in the machine region. What we did. I mean, because this is a novel. This is a new work in this confusing times it's hard to to sit down with decision makers. What we did was to establish a connection with the civil protection. So firefighters, we show them our results in a different study area. And they, they were very happy with these results actually because it goes. It's more or less aligned with their knowledge on the on the on the field. It's more or less aligned on what are their concerns. So, so basically the decision makers will now be pressured in different fronts so on one side. It's basically academia saying we need to do this or that. And we know that then we know we have people that know to terrain the land and are also demanding some changes. So, there's obviously room and needs for for for something to change in Portugal, the large majority of investment goes to fire suppression. Since 2000 year 2000, we, we apply three times as three times much money into suppression then then into into prevention into prevention. Of course it's costly, but we don't need to implement the entire fuel break in one week one in in in one week one year. So we have room to more or less implement bits by bits. Okay, so we don't need to have a big expense, expensive fuel break from zero from year zero to your year one. It can be bit by bit. Yeah, absolutely. And presumably it'll have to be, you know, proceed bit by bit, but yeah, changing the way that budgets are allocated I think is a big part of the issue. So there's no questions currently in the chat but I did actually have one for you. Samuel, I was just wondering when you were talking about, you know, the the modeling that you're doing and you talked about examples in Portugal you talked about examples, you know, in Australia as well. I was wondering what the main application is this more for like insurance companies trying to figure out, you know, how to how to work it in terms of you know their rates or is this more in terms of fire suppression or, you know, trying to fight fires. I think at this stage that this granularity as we're doing it, it's rather work that it's rather on the focus for people that look at the portfolio. So like an insurance companies or as I mentioned us, for example investors that need to take climate risks into their consideration but also generally for I think governmental authorities or countries that should have a rough idea of costs of natural I think for for adaptation. You need a much more local knowledge than what we produce I mean we're in this trade off with trying to do something that works all around the globe so having global consistency and probably that helps identifying hotspots obviously you're going to go towards direction of adaptation and obviously the work as Bruno is doing it this is much more relevant that you need to have local stakeholders you need to act with people on the ground that actually know in very much detail. How does the landscape look like. So we're a bit in this trade off. And I think in that that format is now it's rather for people that that want to have a global consistent picture of something. What sure strikes me about all of this research is that it happens on very different geographic scales, and it happens in very different timescales to so Dirk was talking about, you know there's a two or three months kind of advanced warning, you know in terms of sea surface temperatures before they see the drought in the patent all and it seems like that that's maybe one of the issues is that you know the firefighters are working on a different time frame than policymakers who are different, you know, and then the scientists are kind of spread across the spectrum and is that would you say that are there any biggest challenges and advancing, you know wildfire research or is it simply that the climate is changing so quickly. What do you think. Well, I think one of the relief the key challenges is that the background climate is changing really really rapidly. And I think that there's this very strong. You see donning impacts very strongly, and obviously fires have a big big social component as well so whether a fire starts. It's not only the climate but also if it's people that have a barbecue in the forest, or as we had it in the US this year, last year that do a gender reveal party in the forest that's gone bad. So you have a big big social impact as well. And I think regarding the timescale. It's definitely very, very helpful. If you have a prevention in place, as Bruno suggest, be that you have a seasonal forecast so if you know that there's information conditions that are in the climate system that you probably do a bit of more information at the before the fire season. And then obviously with the work that we are doing that you basically just have an idea of what's going on. It's already a hard enough question. Can I just add on the answer of Samo needs to focus on things that we can change climate change is it's happening and it's going to happen and it's getting worse and worse. And the emissions are continuing so so we are most likely going to have a severe consequences in our climate. What we can change is our habits so we missions and our landscape. So we need to have this local knowledge like Samo was suggesting, but also at the same time we need to have this general picture of what's what is happening in the entire globe. So we need both both approaches of really a large scales, but also in the local scale so both, both approaches are quite interesting and they are answering to different questions, but together they basically build up the knowledge that we can provide. Yeah, absolutely. And I think. Well, thank you so much. So I'm pleased to be able to now introduce Dr. Benedetto de Rosa, who's a researcher at the National Research Council, the Institute of Methodologies for Environmental Analysis in Italy. Dr. Rosa, if you're ready, please go ahead and screen share and we'd love to hear your presentation. Okay, thank you. Perfect. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Excuse me. And my name is Benedetto de Rosa. Good afternoon, everybody. And today I'm talking about the determination of California Forest Fire Arosol properties observed in potenza by the multi-weathering Raman Lidar Musa. Let's start the first part of my presentation deals with biomass burning aerosols. The biomass burning aerosols are one of the key aerosol types in climate research. But what are atmospheric aerosols? It is a suspension of solid or liquid particles in the atmosphere. A result and clouds interaction are the larger sorts of uncertainty in our understanding of climate system, as we can see from the panel to the right. But why this uncertainty? Clouds and aerosol property vary at scale smaller than those resolved in climate models. The biomass burning aerosols affect the energy balance in the atmosphere. The effect is the effect is direct with the scatter and absorption of solar radiation and indirect with the interact with clouds. Also biomass burning aerosol can change the properties of the clouds in the atmosphere. Small and spherical smoke particles have a high efficiency in the scattering. The smoke particles can be lifted a high altitude with the deep convention. In the free troposphere, the pressure is lower. So the flu expanded and the smoke can travel for great distances. During the transport, the particles are modified with a lot of physical processes such as a gross copic water uptake and the coagulation. So, coming back to the main point on 23 October, the immense sonoma fire scorched the 3000 hectares in few days. We know that the forest fire smoke was transported over great distances and reached the south of Italy. As we can see from the forecast of biomass burning aerosol provided by CAMHS at the analysis of the back trajectories. So LiDAR measurement in potenza revealed the presence of aerosol that arrived from California at about 10,000 km. And this is a very interesting result. But what is LiDAR? LiDAR is a class of instruments that uses LiDAR to study atmospheric properties from the ground of the top of the atmosphere. LiDAR can characterize aerosol, gas, clouds and also temperature. This presentation reports measurement carried out in the frame of the project Actrice aerosol profile pilot provision to CAMHS in near real time. Actrice is the aerosol clouds and truss gas research infrastructure and is based on Airlinet. Airlinet is the European aerosol research LiDAR network. The LiDAR Musa in potenza is one of two reference systems in Actrice for aerosol profiling. So we can see the case of study of 26 October. In this case the LiDAR measurements showed the presence of two distinct aerosol layers associated with the fires in California. Okay, now we can see the optical properties retrieved by the LiDAR system. Because these properties are very important because they are associated with important information about the typing of the aerosols. In particular, we can see that given information about the concentration, the composition, the size and the shapes of the particles in the atmosphere. So we can see that from three to five kilometers, values of optical properties could be indicative for a mixture of biomass burning and marine aerosols. Instead between eight to 10 kilometer edge biomass burning the aerosols are predominant with moderately small and spherical smoke particles is important to remember that small and spherical particles have a night scattering efficiency. It's important also said that the ability of LiDAR Musa to probe very thin layers of aerosol with an atmospheric optical depth of 1.6% of the total. The characterization of this optospheric optical depth is associated with the attenuation of solar radiation. The characterization of these layers in tropopause is important to do their effect in the climate change. In conclusion, we can say that this presentation have demonstrated how the biomass burning aerosol can travel across transcontinental distances and potentially influencing the climate on the planet. Fires will increase in the coming years due to global warming. So high resolution measurement of biomass burning aerosol will be increasingly important. In particular, accurate measurement will be needed in tropopause where aerosol have a long residence times and can travel for great distances. In the future, the assimilation of LiDAR data from network like actress and satellite are very important to improve the model skills. Thank you for your attention. Thank you so much. There's a question for Samuel Luthi and this is from David Renka and he's asking, do you have a reference point on how much the economy has already impacted by wildfire? How severe was the increase over the last few years? Yeah, that's a very good question because it's actually impact data is a very rare thing in this world, so it's hard to get those, especially in a global consistent manner because reporting standards are quite a bit different across the whole world and you will be heavily biased towards richer countries that actually have such a thing as reporting standards. I think during the last presentation I opened an Excel and made a quick calculation. So I think I'll just refrain, we work with AM.data which is an impact database which is maintained in Belgium. It's one of the few open source impact databases. So I just looked at the US damages and in the period from the 2000s, so from 2000 to 2009. And they report 11.5 billion US dollars as wildfire damages. And when we look at the period, so from 2010 to 2019. So the next decade, this number is up to 74.6, so it's roughly four-folded. This is of course a very rough estimates as many smaller events don't get reported in these disaster data sets, but I think to have a bit of an answer on it, it's certainly not globally concise, but maybe with a bit of a US focus we can say something. And it's also important to remember that it's not only the fires, it's also that for example in the US that people are building nice houses into forests, which then cause much more, much more damages. So it's not only the climate impact, but it's also the societal or the exposure change in our framework, which is important. I hope that helps. In Colorado, and we had probably six to eight weeks this past summer, where it was just awful air quality, because of, you know, the fires that were burning. And sometimes it was locally, you know, within the state and sometimes it was California or the Pacific Northwest, so it's certainly becoming a health issue as well. Okay, for Dr. de Rosa, what are the wavelengths used in this study. Okay, in this, in this study, we use a free woman and 355 is the first woman. The second is five hungry in the 32 and the first is 1,064 is the typical Wolverine that we use in the in the LiDAR system for the retrieval of the atmospheric composition of the aerosols. I was also wondering, Dr. de Rosa, when you were talking about, you know, in terms of the tropospheric transport of these particles. Is there a feedback in terms of weather. I mean, I think geoscientists are generally used to volcanic eruptions, for example, affecting whether you know that you're with others. I mean, in reality, the biomass building aerosols are very similar to volcanic erection, because when the particles arrive to the top of the troposphere. The industry in the in the trap of ours is is a typically that particles can travel for longer distances and arrive and can arrive in different states and different countries and in this case, we, we have 10,000 kilometers in the trajectories. Yeah, to me it's just amazing that the smoke can travel and be trapped, you know, for 10,000 kilometers. In reality, also the volcano eruption can arrive during the eruption in the stratosphere and dangerous impact in the climate change. Are there any additional questions? I want to thank all of our speakers today, including Dr. feel and even though he wasn't able to join us for the for the Q&A, and please if any journalists would like any of the resources that were mentioned here email addresses, or Dr. Feelin's presentation, please just email me media at egu.eu. And there's thank yous in the chat to all the speakers as well. And then I just wanted to mention that there'll be one last press conference of this meeting. And that will start today at 5pm in unique time Paris time 1700 and that is learning from the past catastrophes climate and cultural change very much and for your attention and for your presentation.