Posted on 10/13/2009 6:36:15 PM PDT by americanophile
A changing climate, population growth and a decade-long housing boom has proved to be a combustible mix for the city of Los Angeles.
Not only are the fires in LA becoming more frequent, but these days they are also less predictable and a lot bigger.
More and more of them are now referred to as mega-fire and the response, in California at least, is to fight them with equal force.
In the last few lazy days of summer an act of arson tore through 10,000 hectares within a day and doubled in size every day for the first four days.
The fire, dubbed the Station Fire, became the largest wildfire in Los Angeles county history.
In Hollywood the fight is cinematic in its scope. Fire crews known as hotshots work the ridge lines, firefighting paratroopers called smokejumpers drop in to inaccessible areas, backed up by engine crews, helicopters, two DC10s and for the first time a 747 that can drop more than 70,000 litres of retardant in one go.
There are climate change sceptics out there for sure, but you will not find too many of them in the ranks of the California firefighters.
Here on the front lines, they are all convinced that something has changed in the last 10 years.
Battalion leader, Pat Titus has a 30-year fire fighting record, and during the Station Fire, his team was pinned down defending a children's holiday camp deep in the forest above LA's northern fringe.
Mr Titus says when he was a young hotshot himself, a big fire was 6,000 hectares and on most of them, the crews could fight them "direct".
"Now, it's so common that a fire is 100,000 acres [40,500 hectares]," he said.
"That happens almost every year now and the difference is that now the intensities
(Excerpt) Read more at abc.net.au ...
That's baloney, pure baloney.
...no doubt. Perhaps we’re just in a drought cycle - 30 years seems like a long time, but not for weather cycles I’m guessing. The Earth goes through ice ages, mini ice ages, and presumably warming and drought periods too...I just wish it was more like it used to be.
I don’t know where you live, but it’s been raining all day in L.A. and raining hard at times. Currently, the concern is re mudslides at the site of the Station Fire. The article you posted is uninformed rubbish.
Southern Cal has always been an arid desert. Read Two Years Before the Mast by Dana, a contemporary description of the California Coast a hundred fifty years ago...same/same, Santa Ana winds included, for your sailing pleasure.
Interesting to note that they did not mention the lawsuits from the envirowhackos that prevented proper forest management that directly contributed to the severity of the fire.
SZ
Not clearing brush, and not maintaining fire breaks has a consequence. Rainfall not withstanding this is largely a self inflicted wound.
In Southern California, the number of wildfires caused by people was around 4,000 — between 2001 and 2005; 3,200 in 2006.
Increased sharply, to 5,140 in 2007 and 5,208 in 2008, according to the data.
When I was young and growing up in Pasadena and Arcadia, we had frequent thunderstorms, but if you ask my wife the same question, she doesn't recall there being many storms, and we're not that different in ages - the rain cycle in Southern California is cyclical in nature, with dry years and wet years. I've seen Azusa canyon filled with water as it came rushing down out of the mountains, and have walked up the same riverbed with narry a trickle showing.
This is not to say there's not been a change here - there has - the summers have been far more mild for nearly a decade, especially compared to the infernos of the late 1990’s. But then again, I understand that it was blazing in the early 1970’s too, and the flooding of the early 1980’s is well ingrained into the minds of many, especially in the Sunland area where so many homes were lost.
As for fires being more common - the 1960’s had huge fires, not in the mountains, but in the hills around the Los Angeles basin, wiping out tracks of homes in the Bel Air community, just to name one notable location. I remember Doctor George and his wonderful documentaries on those fires. Forest fires? Sure, they're larger today because so many common forestry techniques are banned, such as logging to thin out the forest and controlled burns which might affect air quality.
This winter/spring should see the return of the rains of the early 1980’s, bad news for Sunland once again, as just like before, their hillsides are bare, and a considerable amount of rainfall is predicted before next summer.
Oh it’s always been arid, but I recall it raining much more in years past. We used to get lots of subtropic storms from the ‘Pineapple Express’ which just doesn’t happen any more.
I agree with your points, and yes, there were definately more thunderstorms in the 70s and 80s than there are now. There were great lightning shows and lots of power outages in the Foothills...just doesn’t happen much anymore.
And then we will have a La Niña winter and it will rain like crazy like it did a few years ago and everyone will complain about too much rain.
Old news. It’s raining here now. We are past fire season and entering Mudslide season.
The cycle of weather here though isn't all that different than the cycle down in Mexico. The Mayans developed their calendars so they could more easily utilize the weather cycles to deal with the expected droughts or flooding, depending on where in the cycle they are.
I’ll bet we’ve had what 1/2 inch max today?
This is a site that has the rainfall for over 100 years. It doesn’t match the story line.
http://home.att.net/~station_climo/LACVPRCP.GIF
I remember a geologist who pointed out that droughts lasting for hundreds of years were common in the geological record of California.
But that being said, an irony of this is that a while back, there was a California company that intended to build a fire-fighting airship. And had they done so, much of these fires could have been contained.
While it seems improbable, airships are a superb technique to fight wild fires. They can carry an enormous payload of water, and by being able to maintain their position, don’t have to dump all their water at once, but can “rain” on the fire for a length of time. And rain strongly inhibits wild fires.
They could also saturate areas around the fire to channelize it by creating sodden fire breaks.
It does not have to be directly over the fire to do so, either, but can direct an indirect spray and also use prevailing winds.
Yet another advantage is that they can quickly refill their tank by landing on a body of water or an open air tank. Changes in weight are handled by compressors to store or release extra helium as needed, and the guidance engines can typically fly the airship at speeds of 30-35mph.
Sounds expensive and complicated. How about just not living there, or taking fire reducing measures, or simply saying “That’s life”?
I lived in California for 28 years and I could count the number of thunderstorms on the fingers of one hand.
California is a desert.
If you live in southern California now you had better lay in some earthquake supplies; you will likely need them between Jan - March of next year.
Write this on your calender.
And stay away from Sepulveda Bl for the next two days.
Not living there is not really an option, unless you leave the State. And in the southwest as a whole, dozens of such fires every dry season are common, destroy billions of dollars in property, and kill ordinary people and firefighters.
An airship, on the other hand, costs about $5-7 million, and would be working for half the year.
BTW, I’ve been exiled in Nashville since 1994; lived in Winnetka, one mile from the epicenter.
And how many airships are required to prevent/fight these fires? A few trillion worth?
In fairness, Pineapple Express events are more likely in El Nina or non-Nino years and we are now in a Nino phase; you’re getting bashed by the typhoon remnants that glanced off Japan a few days ago right now.
Well, considering that a fire fighting airship would carry perhaps a four ton, or 1,000 gallon water tank, and that a typical 1.5 inch fire hose sprays a bit less than 100 gallons a minute, that would still be ten minutes of continual spray before it needed refill. One airship could put a serious dent into a wildfire.
That would take out a typical grass or scrub fire, which is the majority of the fires in the southwest. Plus you need to remember that it does not replace firefighters and aircraft support, it augments them.
Granted, it is not going to take down a major forest fire, but then again, only nature is powerful enough to do that.
No knocking you personally here, but, if you knew anything about aviation you’d know the idea is simply not viable for a number of reasons.
Why do you say that?
Hey L.A., it’s hot, it’s dry, the fires burn houses down every year. If you don’t have the money to rebuild, neither do the taxpayers. Get it?!? Now for a change, please move back to the other high and dry L.A., New Orleans.
Down here we got drizzle only. Come on, bring it. (Doing my rain dance — not that I wish mud sliding into people’s homes)
Okay, if that’s the case, then why was a California airship company making one? Wetzone Engineering of Huntington Beach.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2425-gigantic-airships-aim-to-damp-forest-fires.html
Well, it really depends on where you lived. If you lived in the Foothill communities we definately used to see more thunderstorms. As the incoming subtropical mssses moved through they would colide with the San Gabriel and San Bernadino Mountains, and you would get heavy rainfall and quite a lot of lighting and thunder; just haven’t seen that consistently in recent years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.