suppression, most recently aggravated by envirowacos blocking the removal o f dead trees.
but it takes an idiot like you to think that unprecedented fires reflect an unprecedented (and previously un-noticed) level of mismanagement. It's tak ing wishful thinking to absurd levels - and if we wanted absurd idiocy, you would be the obvious source.
Hey SL0W MAN,
Only an IDIOT would claim that the forests have been properly managed in th e last 50 years, so I guess you are ACCEPTING that dubious accolade. I STRO NGLY suggest that you google "mismanagement of forests" and get back to me with what you find.
The natural California fires weren't extremely intense. The bigger trees survived.
We have immense fire storms now, because we put the small ones out.
Steel roof, no gutters, nothing flammable for the required distance around the house, all the small stuff trimmed, pine needles raked. That's what people should do if they want to live in a forest. We won't get a firestorm because everything is managed for miles in all directions.
Costs us roughly $500 a year.
You can't do a lot to protect your property from floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, landslides, or arsonists.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
e suppression, most recently aggravated by envirowacos blocking the removal of dead trees.
, but it takes an idiot like you to think that unprecedented fires reflect an unprecedented (and previously un-noticed) level of mismanagement. It's t aking wishful thinking to absurd levels - and if we wanted absurd idiocy, y ou would be the obvious source.
lade. I STRONGLY suggest that you google "mismanagement of forests" and get back to me with what you find.
As usual, you fail elementary comprehension. I didn't claim " that the fore sts have been properly managed in the last 50 years". I claimed that unprec edented fires probably didn't reflect an unprecedented level of mismanageme nt. It would have had to have kicked in very suddenly to explain why this y ears fires are so much worse than those you have had in previous years (whi ch you presumably want to blame on mismanagement in the same forests).
You can't manage forests in a way that prevents fires. You can usually mana ge them in a way that makes the fires that do happen small and localised, b ut an exceptionally dry summer can give the fires more fuel and more opport unities to leap over to the next bit of forest.
Climate change does seem to have a habit of delivering exceptionally dry su mmers to some places, some of the time.
formatting link
ught-wildfire-outlook/
El Nino and La Nina are climate changes, but they've been alternating for a s long as we've kept records (and probably a lot longer). More CO2 in the a tmosphere probably changes what actually happens all the way through the al ternation, but I've yet to come across anything that spells this out.
es like a furnace bellows. And a destabilized jet stream is a direct conseq uence of global warming, as has been explained numerous times.
Or rotting.
n't be requires probably thousands of miles of PG&E overhead electrical lin e which by its very nature is fragile. Meaning lines don't hold up well wit h trees falling on them or extremely intense fires burning at their base.
What makes you think that? You know very little about the "natural Californ ia fires".
re during one of these wind events,? he said.
cause of wildfires; 85 percent are human-caused.
If nobody does fuel reduction burns in dry periods in winter, which happen s a lot in Australia. It helps, but it doesn't prevent all forest fires.
Nothing air-headed about that. No individual fire is "proof" of anything, b ut a lot of unprecedentedly intense fires happening at much the same time d oes suggest that something usual is going on . Atmospheric CO2 levels at 41
0 ppm haven't been usual for the past 20 million years, so it's goig to be a prime suspect.
Fuel reduction burns are a form of forest management.
that development in wildfire-prone regions has dramatically increased. The report found that between 1990 and 2015 home construction within the perime ter of recent wildfires increased to 286,000 from 177,000.
be isolated by 500 feet to avoid spontaneous ignition.
Until it turns out that it needed to be managed even more intensively.
To avoid floods you build on high ground. To avoid hurricanes, don't build too near the coast. To avoid tornadoes, you don't build in Tornadoe Alley.
To avoid landslides you consult a geologist.
Avoiding arsonists is more difficult - universal health care helps by getti ng onto the nut-cases early, but that isn't infallible.
There's nothing silly about a jet stream altering weather.
Official death toll was a couple thousand, but malnutrition reached
70% of the population.
While 'overnight' is not the most useful timescale for this, others are available, and 'scare' is entirely appropriate for what the models predict as well as what the news reports tell us. It's NOT extrapolation to use a model, it's only extrapolation to sketch and extend a graph.
Inability to understand and use models is curable with education.
ire suppression, most recently aggravated by envirowacos blocking the remov al of dead trees.
on, but it takes an idiot like you to think that unprecedented fires reflec t an unprecedented (and previously un-noticed) level of mismanagement. It's taking wishful thinking to absurd levels - and if we wanted absurd idiocy, you would be the obvious source.
colade. I STRONGLY suggest that you google "mismanagement of forests" and g et back to me with what you find.
rests have been properly managed in the last 50 years". I claimed that unpr ecedented fires probably didn't reflect an unprecedented level of mismanage ment. It would have had to have kicked in very suddenly to explain why this years fires are so much worse than those you have had in previous years (w hich you presumably want to blame on mismanagement in the same forests).
nage them in a way that makes the fires that do happen small and localised, but an exceptionally dry summer can give the fires more fuel and more oppo rtunities to leap over to the next bit of forest.
summers to some places, some of the time.
rought-wildfire-outlook/
as long as we've kept records (and probably a lot longer). More CO2 in the atmosphere probably changes what actually happens all the way through the alternation, but I've yet to come across anything that spells this out.
Hey SL0W MAN,
As usual, you would be WRONG - there has been an "unprecedented" level of m ismanagement for the last 10 years. In fact, it has led to an "unprecedente d" level of DEAD TREES:
formatting link
-wildfires-sierra-nevada Once these DEAD TREES start to burn the conflagration can't be stopped, exc ept by Winter. Various envirowaco groups and endangered species laws have p revented the removal of these DEAD TREES. This is NOT some "new phenomena," but has been known for years:
fire suppression, most recently aggravated by envirowacos blocking the rem oval of dead trees.
g on, but it takes an idiot like you to think that unprecedented fires refl ect an unprecedented (and previously un-noticed) level of mismanagement. It 's taking wishful thinking to absurd levels - and if we wanted absurd idioc y, you would be the obvious source.
accolade. I STRONGLY suggest that you google "mismanagement of forests" and get back to me with what you find.
forests have been properly managed in the last 50 years". I claimed that un precedented fires probably didn't reflect an unprecedented level of mismana gement. It would have had to have kicked in very suddenly to explain why th is years fires are so much worse than those you have had in previous years (which you presumably want to blame on mismanagement in the same forests).
manage them in a way that makes the fires that do happen small and localise d, but an exceptionally dry summer can give the fires more fuel and more op portunities to leap over to the next bit of forest.
y summers to some places, some of the time.
or as long as we've kept records (and probably a lot longer). More CO2 in t he atmosphere probably changes what actually happens all the way through th e alternation, but I've yet to come across anything that spells this out.
mismanagement for the last 10 years. In fact, it has led to an "unpreceden ted" level of DEAD TREES:
The trees seem to have been killed by a beetle plague. Good luck with findi ng a forest management system that could have stopped that
"a majority of the beetle-killed stands are in wilderness or in areas that are too remote and too steep to be logged" which makes "managing" them dist inctly difficult.
xcept by Winter. Various envirowaco groups and endangered species laws have prevented the removal of these DEAD TREES.
They were in places from which they would have been very hard to remove. Do n't you read the links you post?
What you are doing is slavishly retailing Trump's lies about the subject. Y ou are too dim to notice how obvious those lies are.
Prescribed fires - or fuel reduction burns - are old news. We've been doing them in Australia for years. It didn't stop our last summer's fires from b eing spectacularly and unprecedentedly bad, and California seems to be stuc k with the same situation, where a severe drought has made the forests a lo t more inflammable than usual. No amount of "forest management" could have done anything about that.
The relationship between "severe drought" and "climate change" is never par ticularly direct, but it does seem to be real. Claiming that "better forest management" could have prevented the fires does seem to be pure wishful th inking. It may suit Trump's election campaign - but more intelligent voters may notice that "better epidemic management" has lead to meany fewer death s from Covid-19 in places like Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, New Zealand , Australia and Germany, and draw the conclusion that if better management is the solution, Trump isn't the politician to delver it.
But most people live in towns and cities, which could be protected from fires. Paradise CA was a death trap firebomb. Embers ignited the houses (flammable roofs, gutters full of leaves, dry lawns right up the the house) but not the trees.
Some towns in CA are brutal about enforcing fire safety. If you don't manage your property, they'll do it for you and send a gigantic bill.
This is our cabin in the woods. It has been inspected and maintained for fire safety.
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
Steel roof, no vents or gutters, no attic, concrete block first floor, defensible space, trees trimmed, pine needles picked up. If you want to have a house in the woods, do it right.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
If one of those trees close to the place catch fires and fall against one o f those timber walls, or on the wooden stairs and deck, it will burn.
You wouldn't need a whole tree - a decent sized branch would do it.
And try for bit closer to right than that. It looks very like some friends' houses in the bush in Australia which had been fine for decades until a se rious bush fire went through. You need quite a wide tree-and-shrub free sp ace around the dwelling before you can be too optimistic.
When I was a graduate student a couple of us decided to drive down to the s urf - some 60 odd miles away - on a rather hot summer day. We drove some of the way along a four lane dual carriage-way, and went through some bushfir e smoke on the way down. We couldn't come back along that road. The fire f ront had gone across the road about half an hour after we'd driven through the smoke and killed a bunch of people who'd found that they were driving into flames as well as smoke . The flames were hot enough to stop and burn their cars and kill them.
Notice how the tidy homes with fresh paint kept in good condition survive the thermal pulse of a nuclear detonation better than the trashy poor-people homes:
Just another example of how poverty is un-patriotic.
Swimming pools are nasty, and gasoline is dangerous. We have a few very long garden hoses to put out small fires. A giant water tank is uphill, gravity fed to our neighborhood. In case of a big fire, the thing to do is leave.
We won't have a big fire. The safety rules are enforced for miles in all directions.
I've never seen a residential swimming pool in Truckee. Hardly any in San Francisco either.
That's just passing the buck. Even if the land is Federal, it's still the duty of state government to protect the people if Fedaral government fails to get the job done. That's what they are elected to do and why people pay state taxes.
Couldn't be more incompetent if they tried and ever more excuses just shows how bad they are. Where abstract greenwash philosophy replaces common sense, pragmatism and just and getting the job done.
Oh, child, you can't just fling 'bad kitty' judgements at problems, it takes solutions, starting with knowledge and going through planning and execution. A broad-brush castigation of some nebulous assortment of other folk is not knowledge, not a solution, not a plan, and certainly isn't execution. It's just like when the uh-oh squad shows up at an accident, and points, and says "Uh-oh".
The problem is that the research, planning etc takes so long that nothing ever happens. The fire problem has been plain for all to see for decades, so how will it take before they have solutions that actually work, rather than just talking about it ?.
Sadly, the solution which would work involves extracting a lot less fossil carbon and burning very little of it as fuel.
All the people who make money - lots of it - out of doing this don't fancy the idea at all and spend loads of money casting doubt on the scientific ba sis of this approach. It works - as John Larkin reminds us all too often.
formatting link
But in the US the top 1% of the income distribution get to decide what's go od for the people, and their own interests do seem to get more attention th an those of the remaining 99%. Millionaires get just the desserts they wan
Well, the local American Indians told the Spanish about the wirldfires of California in the 1500s. The Indians periodically burned the grass and brush off, precisely to prevent huge wildfires.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.