Search

Soaring Insurance Rates in the West Reflect a Growing Wildfire Crisis on Federal Lands

We are an online community created around a smart and easy to access information hub which is focused on providing proven global and local insights about sustainability

30 May, 2025

This post was originally published on Healthy Forest

In the American West, the threat of wildfire no longer stops at the edge of the forest—it’s now hitting homeowners directly in their wallets. The cost of living with wildfire risk is showing up in a place many didn’t expect: their home insurance bills.

Across California, Colorado, New Mexico, and beyond, property insurance premiums are spiking. Entire zip codes are being flagged as too risky. Some residents are getting dropped altogether, while others are forced onto expensive last-resort plans—if they can find coverage at all.

It’s easy to blame climate change or insurance companies, but the deeper issue lies in the forests themselves. Much of the West is a patchwork of overgrown federal land, choked with dead trees and dry fuels that make catastrophic wildfires more likely every year.

While private property owners are investing thousands to fireproof their homes—clearing vegetation, replacing roofs, installing defensible space—federal lands remain dangerously overstocked. These forests are not just neglected; they’re increasingly hazardous. And when a wildfire breaks out on unmanaged federal forests, it doesn’t stop at the boundary line.

In many Western states, the federal government owns more land than anyone else. Yet it continues to struggle with the pace and scale of forest management. The U.S. Forest Service takes an average of 3.6 years to implement a project after completing environmental review. That’s not fast enough when entire communities are at risk.

Meanwhile, a steady drumbeat of lawsuits from anti-forestry groups continues to delay or halt urgently needed projects. In places like Northern California, Arizona, and Oregon, these lawsuits have blocked fuel reduction efforts for years—leaving communities to face the consequences.

The results are clear: longer, hotter fire seasons. More property loss. More smoke. Higher insurance rates. And greater financial pressure on families and rural economies.

Fortunately, there’s a path forward. Earlier this year, the U.S. House passed the Fix Our Forests Act, a bipartisan bill that would streamline environmental planning, expand the use of proactive tools like fuel breaks and thinning, and reduce legal gridlock. It’s not a silver bullet, but it’s a solid step toward treating wildfire risk where it begins—on the land.

Congress must now take the next step by advancing a Senate version of this bill that includes meaningful litigation reform and faster timelines for fuel reduction projects. This is not a partisan issue. Wildfires don’t care about politics, and neither do insurance companies.

Western families are being forced to shoulder the cost of federal inaction. And those costs are rising fast—whether it’s through insurance premiums, lost coverage, or the growing public price tag of wildfire response and recovery.

The best way to protect homes is to reduce the fuel loads that make fires so destructive in the first place. That means managing forests before they burn, not just reacting afterward.

The West needs a new approach—one rooted in responsibility, science, and urgency. The insurance crisis is just the latest warning sign. If the federal government doesn’t change course, more communities will be priced out, burned out, or left behind.

The flames are getting closer. The time to act is now.

Pass over the stars to rate this post. Your opinion is always welcome.
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

Source: Healthy Forest

You may also like…

Taking the electronic pulse of the circular economy

Taking the electronic pulse of the circular economy

In June, I had the privilege of attending the 2025 E-Waste World, Battery Recycling, Metal Recycling, and ITAD & Circular Electronics Conference & Expo events in Frankfurt, Germany.

Speaking in the ITAD & Circular Electronics track on a panel with global Circular Economy leaders from Foxway Group, ERI and HP, we explored the evolving role of IT asset disposition (ITAD) and opportunities in the circular electronics economy.

The event’s focus on advancing circular economy goals and reducing environmental impact delivered a series of insights and learnings. From this assembly of international expertise across 75+ countries, here are some points from the presentations that stood out for me:

1. Environmental impact of the digital economy

Digitalisation has a heavy material footprint in the production phase, and lifecycle thinking needs to guide every product decision. Consider that 81% of the energy a laptop uses in its lifetime is consumed during manufacture (1 tonne in manufacture is equal to 10,000 tonnes of CO2) and laptops are typically refreshed or replaced by companies every 3–4 years.

From 2018 to 2023, the average number of devices and connections per capita in the world increased by 50% (2.4 to 3.6). In North America (8.2 to 13.4) and Western Europe (5.6 to 9.4), this almost doubled. In 1960, only 10 periodic table elements were used to make phones. In 1990, 27 elements were used and now over 60 elements are used to build the smartphones that we have become so reliant on.

A key challenge is that low-carbon and digital technologies largely compete for the same minerals. Material resource extraction could increase 60% between 2020 and 2060, while demand for lithium, cobalt and graphite is expected to rise by 500% until 2050.

High growth in ICT demand and Internet requires more attention to the environmental footprint of the digital economy. Energy consumption of data centres is expected to more than double by 2026. The electronics industry accounts for over 4% of global GHG — and digitalisation-related waste is growing, with skewed impacts on developing countries.

E-waste is rising five times faster than recycling — 1 tonne of e-waste has a carbon footprint of 2 tonnes. Today’s solution? ‘Bury it or burn it.’ In terms of spent emissions, waste and the costs associated with end-of-life liabilities, PCBAs (printed circuit board assembly) cost us enormously — they generally achieve 3–5% recyclability (75% of CO2 in PCBAs is from components).

2. Regulating circularity in electronics

There is good momentum across jurisdictions in right-to-repair, design and labelling regulations; recycling targets; and voluntary frameworks on circularity and eco-design.

The EU is at the forefront. EU legislation is lifting the ICT aftermarket, providing new opportunities for IT asset disposition (ITAD) businesses. To get a sense, the global market for electronics recycling is estimated to grow from $37 billion to $108 billion (2022–2030). The value of refurbished electronics is estimated to increase from $85.9 billion to $262.2 billion (2022–2032). Strikingly, 40% of companies do not have a formal ITAD strategy in place.

Significantly, the EU is rethinking its Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) management targets, aligned with upcoming circularity and WEEE legislation, as part of efforts to foster the circular economy. A more robust and realistic circularity-driven approach to setting collection targets would better reflect various factors including long lifespans of electronic products and market fluctuations.

Australia and New Zealand lag the EU’s comprehensive e-waste mandated frameworks. The lack of a systematic approach results in environmental degradation and missed positioning opportunities for businesses in the circular economy. While Australia’s Senate inquiry into waste reduction and recycling recommended legislating a full circular economy framework — including for imported and local product design, financial incentives and regulatory enforcement, New Zealand remains the only OECD country without a national scheme to manage e-waste.

3. Extending product lifecycles

Along with data security and digital tools, reuse was a key theme in the ITAD & Circular Electronics track of the conference. The sustainable tech company that I lead, Greenbox, recognises that reuse is the simplest circular strategy. Devices that are still functional undergo refurbishment and are reintroduced into the market, reducing new production need and conserving valuable resources.

Conference presenters highlighted how repair over replacement is being legislated as a right in jurisdictions around the world. Resources are saved, costs are lowered, product life is extended, and people and organisations are empowered to support a greener future. It was pointed out that just 43% of countries have recycling policies, 17% of global waste is formally recycled, and less than 1% of global e-waste is formally repaired and reused.

Right to repair is a rising wave in the circular economy, and legislation is one way that civil society is pushing back on programmed obsolescence. Its global momentum continues at different speeds for different product categories — from the recent EU mandates to multiple US state bills (and some laws) through to repair and reuse steps in India, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The European Commission’s Joint Research Commission has done a scoping study to identify product groups under the Ecodesign framework that would be most relevant for implementing an EU-wide product reparability scoring system.

Attending this event with the entire electronic waste recycling supply chain — from peers and partners to suppliers and customers — underscored the importance of sharing best practices to address the environmental challenges that increased hardware proliferation and complex related issues are having on the world.

Ross Thompson is Group CEO of sustainability, data management and technology asset lifecycle management market leader Greenbox. With facilities in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra, Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch, Greenbox Group provides customers all over the world a carbon-neutral supply chain for IT equipment to reduce their carbon footprint by actively managing their environmental, social and governance obligations.

Image credit: iStock.com/Mustafa Ovec

Renewables Helped Prevent Blackouts on New England’s Hottest Day This Summer

Renewables Helped Prevent Blackouts on New England’s Hottest Day This Summer

Renewable energy sources, such as solar power and battery storage, have helped keep power on in New England, even during peak demand on the hottest day of summer. According to a recent report from the nonprofit Acadia Center, more than 5 gigawatts of behind-the-meter solar provided additional support during peak demand times, despite the temperature […]
The post Renewables Helped Prevent Blackouts on New England’s Hottest Day This Summer appeared first on EcoWatch.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Add your own review

Rating

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.