News feeds tend to cover individual destructive fires, while the record-low burned area across the planet barely reaches them. As of mid-2026, the area of land hit by fires worldwide has sat at a record low for the entire observation period for more than three months now. Every continent is showing figures below its long-term average, with Africa, North and South America, and Europe reaching historic minimums. 

These figures come with two caveats. First, it's a mid-year snapshot, not a final tally. At the very end of June fire activity spiked sharply in Canada and Siberia. And second, the drop in area is driven mainly by savanna fires in tropical Africa, linked to a decline in agricultural burning in Africa's savannas. Africa and Asia remain the largest emission sources even in a record-low year, precisely because of seasonal farm fires. 

But here's the interesting part. The same year that burns a record low became one of the most destructive in memory. 2025 gave the second-lowest fire area in more than two decades and, at the same time, the costliest insured fire losses in history: over 90 deaths, more than 300,000 evacuated, and the Los Angeles fires ranking among the five costliest natural disasters of all time. 

The overall area is pulled down by savanna and grass fires in Africa, vast in territory but nearly harmless to people. What rises, in money and lives, is forest fires in populated temperate and northern latitudes: California, Canada, the Mediterranean. Where empty grass used to burn, less burns now, and where houses stand, fire is getting hotter and coming closer. 

Local extreme events do happen and deserve attention, but they don't always reflect the global picture. Climate risks should be judged on long-term statistics, not through the alarmist lens of isolated extreme events.

Wildfires are at a record low across the planet. So why was last year the most destructive on record?