As if enough wasn't going wrong already. I hear that the ash was falling like serious snow at times. "It felt like night until about
Welcome to the side effects of climate change. We had that in Sydney at the end of last year.
My wife bought an air-purifier to minimise the number of smoke particles ending up in her lungs.
The local hospitals qot swamped by people who had more serious respiratory problems.
The sky is falling (literally). It was very dark in Santa Cruz CA today. Click the "AQI Loop" tab.
Animated satellite view of the smoke situation: This works only during California daylight hours. It shows an animated satellite image of the smoke moving over California from NW to SE. Band=GeoColor Loop=60 (or higher) The white stuff is clouds or fog. The pink or beige stuff is smoke from numerous fires. Notice that we're also getting second hand smoke from fires in Oregon.
A larger view:
Give it time for all the frames to load. You might get an image that "flashes" during the animation. It's caused by missing frames in the download. Just hit your browser "refresh" icon or [F5] on a PC, and the browser will download any missing or partial frames.
A better air quality map: Click on "Loops" tab.
-- Jeff Liebermann snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D
Sides effects of poor forest management, more like it. California has always had fires, but years ago, whole teams were employed to keep the area safe. Ineffective local government and probably corruption as well...
Chris
e:
l=0
the end of last year.
s ending up in her lungs.
ory problems.
Not in Australia. The most recent fires season was unprecedented, and a Roy al Commission into what had gone wrong blamed climate change - the forest h ad gotten very dry and lots more of the vegetation was dry enough to burn than ever before. We've only got written documentation for about two hundre d years, but sedimentary records go back a lot further.
We had a lot of fuel reduction burns before the fire season got under way, so the forests were being managed fairly energetically. It wasn't enough.
d to keep
And enough climate change to make the whole job quite a bit more difficult than it used to be.
Sorry Bill, the discussion was about California, not Oz.
Ok, i'll stay with the scientific method and remain skeptical...
Chris
The dynamics is similar. In some places, things grow, die, and compost. Or are hauled away as lumber. In some climates, everything that grows eventually burns. Modern fire supression changes the time scales and magnitudes of the burns. Frequent small fires, suitably managed, become gigantic fire storms.
Conservation of carbon is real.
rote:
a?dl=0
at the end of last year.
cles ending up in her lungs.
ratory problems.
a Royal Commission into what had gone wrong blamed climate change - the for est had gotten very dry and lots more of the vegetation was dry enough to b urn than ever before. We've only got written documentation for about two hu ndred years, but sedimentary records go back a lot further.
Over the entire universe. At the moment we are digging up fossil carbon tha t had been safely buried for hundreds of millions of years, burning it for fuel, and dumping loads of extra CO2 in the atmosphere. About half of it st ays there. Of the rest, some is still dissolving in the oceans, and some is feeding extra plant growth
The atmospheric CO2 level has been around 270 ppm in every interglacial sin ce we started having ice ages, a few million years ago.
When we started measuring it systematically in 1958, it had already got up to 315 ppm. It's now at 410 ppm, which is higher than it has been in the pa st 20 million years. It's pushed up the average surface temperature of the planet by 1 degree Kelvin, which has pushed up the vapour pressure of water over the oceans by 6%.
Some plants are getting more water, and more CO2, and growing more flammabl e stuff like leaves and branches. If this dries out in a dry summer - and c limate change can deliver very dry summers to some places - it can burn wit h some enthusiasm.
ote:
?dl=0
at the end of last year.
les ending up in her lungs.
atory problems.
Royal Commission into what had gone wrong blamed climate change - the fore st had gotten very dry and lots more of the vegetation was dry enough to bu rn than ever before. We've only got written documentation for about two hun dred years, but sedimentary records go back a lot further.
ay, so the forests were being managed fairly energetically. It wasn't enoug h.
yed to keep
ult than it used to be.
By which you mean that you have been suckered by the fossil carbon extracti on industry propaganda, and prefer being spoon-fed with self-serving lies to finding out what the actual science is telling us. Misleading the public is done on an industrial scale these days.
John Larkin is addicted to the product, because it comes with added extra f lattery.
Hey SL0W MAN,
No SL0W MAN, welcome to the effects of DECADES of forest mismanagement and fire suppression, most recently aggravated by envirowacos blocking the removal of dead trees.
e:
dl=0
the end of last year.
s ending up in her lungs.
ory problems.
ppression, most recently aggravated by envirowacos blocking the removal of dead trees.
Dream on. These may be your preferred explanations for what is going on, bu t it takes an idiot like you to think that unprecedented fires reflect an u nprecedented (and previously un-noticed) level of mismanagement. It's takin g wishful thinking to absurd levels - and if we wanted absurd idiocy, you w ould be the obvious source.
Yeah, if you don't actually understand an issue, better to make up something that appeals to your inner self.
=0
on"
The destabilized jet stream is what came down and exploded those flames lik e a furnace bellows. And a destabilized jet stream is a direct consequence of global warming, as has been explained numerous times.
The Leventhal Center for Advanced Urbanism, a Massachusetts Institute of Te chnology division, estimates that at least 25 percent of Californians now l ive in what the center calls fire-prone locations.
Jon Keeley, a U.S. Geological Survey research scientist, said that populati on growth makes wildfires more deadly, and more likely.
?More people on the landscape means more opportunity for a fire dur ing one of these wind events,? he said.
The National Park Service agreed that too many people is the leading cause of wildfires; 85 percent are human-caused.
A Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences analysis confirmed that d evelopment in wildfire-prone regions has dramatically increased. The report found that between 1990 and 2015 home construction within the perimeter of recent wildfires increased to 286,000 from 177,000.
By 2050, California?s population will exceed an unsustainable 50 mi llion, a 25 percent increase from the current level. Try to imagine the apo calyptic vision of a California with 10 million more people, all of whom wi ll need, to name a few essentials, housing, water, electrical power, transp ortation and education.
A bunch of other undeniable, scientific, databased statistics about the sup er-overpopulated mismanaged mess you have there:
Your governor is a confused idiot.
That's silly. When the first Spanish arrived here, the natives warned them about the fires. Plants capture CO2. In California, it returns to the atmosphere by burning.
Also silly. It's closer to 100%. Always has been.
Certainly building death traps like Paradise is criminal. The houses all burned but the trees didn't.
The cause doesn't matter. There will always be ignition sources, lately lightning. The fewer the ignition sources and the more resources available to put fires out, the bigger the uncontrollable fire storms get. And our airhead governor says the fires are proof of Climate Change.
Absent forest management, more ignition sources is good.
We have a cabin in the woods, and just spent $3K to have the trees trimmed and the brush cleaned up. The first floor is made of concrete blocks. The local powers are brutal about keeping this area safe from fires, but it's expensive.
Things don't just build up and overnight become a crisis. Extrapolation is a good way to scare yourself.
I've met him. Couldn't agree more.
Can only say what I read in various places, but did I mention arson as well ?. Common problem apparently...
Chris
Isn't that what I said up thread ?. So many people have lost everything due to decades of mismanagement and a local government that seem incapable of doing anything to fix the problem. Too much fuel, expect bigger fires.
Why do so many vote for such idiots ?...
Chris
So why are so many passive in the face of such disaster,rather than demanding action to solve the problem ?. Let em do it to you and you have yourself to blame, to a degree...
Chris
On a sunny day (Sat, 12 Sep 2020 10:33:09 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :
l=0
eason"
like a furnace bellows. And a destabilized jet stream is a direct consequen ce of global warming, as has been explained numerous times.
Okay, so in your mind, the 60MPH northerly wind gusts had no effect on the rapid spread and increased intensity of the fires already burning?
Looks like a bunch of dead and destitute people would disagree with you.
Technology division, estimates that at least 25 percent of Californians no w live in what the center calls fire-prone locations.
ation growth makes wildfires more deadly, and more likely.
That's the point. Tens of millions of people living in areas they shouldn't be requires probably thousands of miles of PG&E overhead electrical line w hich by its very nature is fragile. Meaning lines don't hold up well with t rees falling on them or extremely intense fires burning at their base.
during one of these wind events,? he said.
se of wildfires; 85 percent are human-caused.
t development in wildfire-prone regions has dramatically increased. The rep ort found that between 1990 and 2015 home construction within the perimeter of recent wildfires increased to 286,000 from 177,000.
Between the intense feet and embers, a flammable structure would need to be isolated by 500 feet to avoid spontaneous ignition.
million, a 25 percent increase from the current level. Try to imagine the apocalyptic vision of a California with 10 million more people, all of whom will need, to name a few essentials, housing, water, electrical power, tra nsportation and education.
Apparently they have when the state wakes up one morning and suddenly finds millions of people need to be evacuated.
super-overpopulated mismanaged mess you have there:
on"
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required