Los Angeles Fire storm

I began this thread with a longer piece analysis which places the current LA fires as a pivotal point in history. The writer believes they are that serious and that significant.

The fires are not even controlled at this stage. The graphs John Dee posted from The Economist highlighted just how off the page the damage and the timing of the fire is. These size fires in mid winter !!! Holy xhit.

One of the absolute key issues about this disaster is that rapidly increasing temperatures caused by global warming are the key to the ferocity and timing of the event. In fact one can make exactly the same statement about the string of massive unheralded wildfires in the past few years. The destruction Fort McMurry in Canada in 2016. The massive fires in Greece, Italy, Siberia. Then there is the succession of record wild fires in California and Canada over in recent times. But California is in another league in financial terms when it comes to costly wildfire damages. I believe that is why Steve Schmidt things this is the event, like the sinking of the Titanic, that will turn history.

Politically there is still total denial from US Republicans generally and Donald Trump in particular that human created global warming is the major driver of these events. And consistent with that denial is the refusal to realise that the situation can only get worse as temperatures increase.

What does worse mean ? For a start lets see how the insurance industry operates as this disaster unfolds. I opened a thread on this topic elsewhere. It isn't hard to join the dots and see how financial systems, banks and communities will become very unstable when insurance becomes prohibitive or impossible to obtain.

ASF is an investors forum. Investors don't win if the market ignores existential risks.

basilio said:

I began this thread with a longer piece analysis which places the current LA fires as a pivotal point in history. The writer believes they are that serious and that significant.

The fires are not even controlled at this stage. The graphs John Dee posted from The Economist highlighted just how off the page the damage and the timing of the fire is. These size fires in mid winter !!! Holy xhit.

One of the absolute key issues about this disaster is that rapidly increasing temperatures caused by global warming are the key to the ferocity and timing of the event. In fact one can make exactly the same statement about the string of massive unheralded wildfires in the past few years. The destruction Fort McMurry in Canada in 2016. The massive fires in Greece, Italy, Siberia. Then there is the succession of record wild fires in California and Canada over in recent times. But California is in another league in financial terms when it comes to costly wildfire damages. I believe that is why Steve Schmidt things this is the event, like the sinking of the Titanic, that will turn history.

Politically there is still total denial from US Republicans generally and Donald Trump in particular that human created global warming is the major driver of these events. And consistent with that denial is the refusal to realise that the situation can only get worse as temperatures increase.

What does worse mean ? For a start lets see how the insurance industry operates as this disaster unfolds. I opened a thread on this topic elsewhere. It isn't hard to join the dots and see how financial systems, banks and communities will become very unstable when insurance becomes prohibitive or impossible to obtain.

ASF is an investors forum. Investors don't win if the market ignores existential risks.

List of wildfires - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Click to expand...

Isn't Biden still the President?
Why isn't there anything about his Government in all of your postings?
Haven't they been in Government for the last few years?
Do you think you may be a bit OCD?

sptrawler said:

Wasn't the lack of water an issue?

Click to expand...

That can happen if there is no rain.

Anyway, I ts up to the experts in the US to decide if more can be done. We will see what Trump actually does, at the moment he's more interested in blaming others than promising Federal assistance.

It's weird I can see a Bas thread, but thankfully not his posts. Let me guess "Climate Change" "Trump Bad".

On the climate change front where was the preparation?
More rainfall than usual so you already know its going to produce excessive fuel loads.
Low humidity can be tracked fairly easily.

This sht isn't a surprise. Why are the alarmists in government not taking it seriously?

Same thing is happening in nsw right now. Lots of rain the past few years. Sooner or later humidity will drop to the 30s and that extra fuel will be unstoppable.

moXJO said:

Same thing is happening in nsw right now. Lots of rain the past few years. Sooner or later humidity will drop to the 30s and that extra fuel will be unstoppable.

Click to expand...

Yep, a few years ago I called the huge NSW south coast fires months in advance, my mate in the RFS sticks by the official line but he is weakening

Around here there are hundreds of acres of NP that have not seen a burn off for at least 25 years, when it happens, (as it must one day) hundreds, even thousands, of koalas, wallabies, echidnas, goannas, marsupials etc will all be sacrificed on the altar of Gaia to appease the greenies

We need to rethink gumtrees as being a protected native. They are basically made to promote bushfire and wipe out the other species.
California planted a bunch and had to tear them out again.

macca said:

Yep, a few years ago I called the huge NSW south coast fires months in advance, my mate in the RFS sticks by the official line but he is weakening

Around here there are hundreds of acres of NP that have not seen a burn off for at least 25 years, when it happens, (as it must one day) hundreds, even thousands, of koalas, wallabies, echidnas, goannas, marsupials etc will all be sacrificed on the altar of Gaia to appease the greenies

Click to expand...

So sad to think that will be the case.
Perhaps if the "Greenies" were made to be on the front line then their song sheet may be a bit different to the current one.

moXJO said:

We need to rethink gumtrees as being a protected native. They are basically made to promote bushfire and wipe out the other species.
California planted a bunch and had to tear them out again.

Click to expand...

And a heap of other countries, I read that Portugal has a major problem with them.

They were planted to be made into paper but not managed properly and now they have massive fires as well

The Aboriginals caused the problem but also knew how to manage the problem, burn often when the weather suits is the easiest way.

The ridiculous requirements for a local RFS unit to do a simple burn off in winter clearly demonstrate that head office really don't want it to happen

macca said:

And a heap of other countries, I read that Portugal has a major problem with them.

They were planted to be made into paper but not managed properly and now they have massive fires as well

The Aboriginals caused the problem but also knew how to manage the problem, burn often when the weather suits is the easiest way.

The ridiculous requirements for a local RFS unit to do a simple burn off in winter clearly demonstrate that head office really don't want it to happen

Click to expand...

To burn off the road verge in front of our place, we have to get permission from several Government departments. Rivers and Waterways or whatever it is called is one. Not a river or waterway in sight apart from the road side drain, man made on ever road!!!!

basilio said:

The first conversation is about long term climate changes which are largely driven by natural forces or extreme externalities. And yes the climate is always changing in some way as a result of these factors - usually slowly over many hundreds/thousands of years

The second conversation is about the extreme climate change that has happened in the past 50 years that has been driven almost entirely by human produced greenhouse gases and now threatens to make large parts of the earth too hot for current ecosystems.

Referencing the first discussion and then ignoring the reality of human influence on climate in the present situation is at the core of our current problems.

Click to expand...

The "issue" I take with climate change (in general, not referring specifically to you or your posts) is this.

Let's put all argument to the side and just take the claims as correct. That is, the climate is changing both naturally and due to human activities. All argument's aside, let's just take that as true.

So what do we do?

There are two logical courses of action:

1. Actions to stop or at least slow the change.

2. Actions to mitigate the impact of the change.

From there it rapidly plunges down a very slippery slope into the abyss simply because there's no broad agreement on how important it is.

Someone will propose addressing point 1, someone else will object to them doing so as soon as they realise it involves putting wind farms on the coast, transmission lines, hydro, nuclear or whatever.

One side will propose addressing point 2, someone else will object to them going so as soon as they realise the blindingly obvious that having eucalypts and pine trees in the suburbs is a really bad idea and building houses so close to each other that fire readily spreads isn't a good idea either.

Hence that's the only comment I'm making on it here. It's an unresolvable issue so long as a good portion of society prioritises conservation over sustainability and visual amenity over safety.

Here's an example on the urban fringe of Adelaide: https://www.google.com/maps/@-34.87...try=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDExMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==

Pan the camera around and take a look. Now realise those big trees next to the house are protected and not allowed to be cut down and that, supposedly, fire won't jump that road - the side with the houses is classified "urban" for fire purposes and not at risk. Yeah, and I see a pig flying past too......

So long as we do silly things to appease those with soft hearts rather than hard heads we'll pay the price. I don't hate trees, but there's a place for them and that's not it. At least change the law so the owner can clear those around the house on their land, and remove any on council land on the same side of the road posing a threat. Think people, think with your head not your heart.

If the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis is correct, we know who to blame and who needs to take action.

I think 20 years ago I was calling for climate preparedness. Australia can go net zero for no effect on the rest of the world. I wonder if they spent a fraction of the massive sums wasted on R&D if they would have come up with better technology.

That's why I can't take it seriously. There's too many contradictions. If these catastrophic things are going to happen why are we wasting money on windmills.
Where's the practical threat mitigation.
Council can't even clean out drains and creeks before floods. A big factor is that we are run by idiots.

moXJO said:

I think 20 years ago I was calling for climate preparedness. Australia can go net zero for no effect on the rest of the world. I wonder if they spent a fraction of the massive sums wasted on R&D if they would have come up with better technology.

That's why I can't take it seriously. There's too many contradictions. If these catastrophic things are going to happen why are we wasting money on windmills.
Where's the practical threat mitigation.
Council can't even clean out drains and creeks before floods. A big factor is that we are run by idiots.

Click to expand...

@moXJO And idiots at the top of the tree employ even worse idiots to be their underlings.
Can't have anyone with a half a brain being 2nd in charge when the top dog doesn't have much at all.
Smacks of where I did my apprenticeship al those eons ago. The biggest duds were the bosses ad nauseum

moXJO said:

I think 20 years ago I was calling for climate preparedness.

Click to expand...

and were they listening?

macca said:

Yep, a few years ago I called the huge NSW south coast fires months in advance

Click to expand...

but was anyone listening?

Dona Ferentes said:

and were they listening?

Click to expand...

Would appear, sadly NO.

Dona Ferentes said:

but was anyone listening?

Click to expand...

And again, apparently NOT.

Came across this analysis of the inevitability of fire in Malibu. It was written in 1998 and pulls together the history of spectacular fires which have wiped out thousands of houses in the canyons and mountains around Malibu. It also explores the relentless determination of developers to continue building and promoting trophy homes regardless of consequences.

The current LA fires have been across the whole region not just Malibu.

Posted inNonfiction

The Case for Letting Malibu Burn ​

Many of California’s native ecosystems evolved to burn. Modern fire suppression creates fuels that lead to catastrophic fires. So why do people insist on rebuilding in the firebelt?


by Longreads December 4, 2018

AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu

Thoughtful stories for thoughtless times.​

Longreads has published hundreds of original stories—personal essays, reported features, reading lists, and more—and more than 13,000 editor’s picks. And they’re all funded by readers like you. Become a member today.

I want to support Longreads
Mike Davis | Ecology of Fear | Metropolitan Books | September 1998 | 20 minutes (5,921 words)
“Homes, of course, will arise here in the thousands. Many a peak will have its castle.”
—John Russell McCarthy, These Waiting Hills (1925)

Late August to early October is the infernal season in Los Angeles. Downtown is usually shrouded in acrid yellow smog while heat waves billow down Wilshire Boulevard. Outside air-conditioned skyscrapers, homeless people huddle miserably in every available shadow.
Across the Harbor Freeway, the overcrowded tenements of the Westlake district—Los Angeles’s Spanish Harlem—are intolerable ovens. Suffocating in their tiny rooms, immigrant families flee to the fire escapes, stoops, and sidewalks. Anxious mothers swab their babies’ foreheads with water while older children, eyes stinging from the smog, cry for paletas: the flavored cones of shaved ice sold by pushcart vendors. Shirtless young men—some with formidable jail-made biceps and mural-size tattoos of the Virgin of Guadalupe across their backs—monopolize the shade of tienda awnings. Amid hundreds of acres of molten asphalt and concrete there is scarcely a weed, much less a lawn or tree.

Thirty miles away, the Malibu coast—where hyperbole meets the surf—basks in altogether different weather. The temperature is 85°F (20 degrees cooler than Downtown), and the cobalt blue sky is clear enough to discern the wispish form of Santa Barbara Island, nearly 50 miles offshore. At Zuma surfers ride the curl under the insouciant gazes of their personal sun goddesses, while at Topanga Beach, horse trainers canter Appaloosas across the wet sand. Indifferent to the misery on the “mainland,” the residents of Malibu suffer through another boringly perfect day.

Needless to say, the existential differences between the tenement district and the gilded coast are enormous at any time. But late summer is the beginning of the wildfire season in Southern California, and that’s when Westlake and Malibu suffer a common lot: catastrophic fire.
According to previous estimates, Westlake (including adjacent parts of Downtown) has the highest urban fire incidence in the nation: one of its two fire stations was inundated by an incredible 20,000 emergency calls in 1993. Some tenements and apartment-hotels have continuous fire histories dating back to their construction in the early twentieth century. The notorious Hotel St. George, for instance, experienced fatal blazes in 1912, 1952, and 1983. Moreover, almost all of the deadly tenement fires in Los Angeles since 1945 have occurred within a one-mile radius of the corner of Wilshire and Figueroa, Downtown.

Malibu, meanwhile, is the wildfire capital of North America and, possibly, the world. Fire here has a relentless staccato rhythm, syncopated by landslides and floods. The rugged 22-mile-long coastline is scourged, on the average, by a large fire (one thousand acres plus) every two and a half years, and the entire surface area of the western Santa Monica Mountains has been burnt three times over the twentieth century. At least once a decade a blaze in the chaparral grows into a terrifying firestorm consuming hundreds of homes in an inexorable advance across the mountains to the sea. Since 1970 five such holocausts have destroyed more than one thousand luxury residences and inflicted more than $1 billion in property damage. Some unhappy homeowners have been burnt out twice in a generation, and there are individual patches of coastline or mountain, especially between Point Dume and Tuna Canyon, that have been incinerated as many as eight times since 1930.