Radio Paradise

Recently Active Forum Topics:

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ... 711, 712, 713 Next

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 3:13pm
islander wrote: nice sidebar. But the three bullet points listed specifically note how human caused climate change is making things worse. would you care to dodge again? Nice conflation. The subject is the Los Angeles fires, right ? And the mismanagement of resources given known and predictable events.

islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 3:07pm

kurtster wrote:

The Santa Ana Winds are unique to the area. And just a little reminder, SoCal is a desert, not some lush tropical paradise. Deserts are known to be dry. One reason they call them deserts IIRC. No matter how much you irrigate the place, it is still a desert. This is the life cycle of deserts and in particular in the area where the Santa Ana's blow.

This particular desert has been populated beyond sustainability.

nice sidebar. But the three bullet points listed specifically note how human caused climate change is making things worse. would you care to dodge again?

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 3:00pm
geoff_morphini wrote: Prove that Santa Ana Wind intensity and occurrence has not changed over time, cite your sources. In what time frame ? Prove that they have. You do know that the Missions were built to stand up and resist these winds ? That they were that big of a deal centuries ago.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:59pm

islander wrote:

kurtster wrote:

In the case of the Santa Ana Winds, climate change has absolutely nothing to do with them. These winds are the direct result of geographic features only which allow these winds to happen, the same as they have for millennia. And will continue until California falls into the ocean because of the Big One. Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try.

And no matter how hard you try to deny it, there is an impact due to human caused climate change. These changes are making the base problem significantly worse.

U.S. wildfires are being fueled by southwestern North America’s driest 22-year period in at least 1,200 years, based on soil water content. Human-caused climate change was responsible for 42% of that soil dryness. ¹
In the western United Stateshuman-caused climate change caused more than half the increase in forest fuel aridity (how dry and flammable vegetation is) since the 1970s and has approximately doubled the cumulative area burned in forest fires since 1984.²
Climate change-related declines in western spring snowpack, and increased evaporation from higher temperatures in spring, summer, and fall, have in the decades since the early 1980s reduced moisture and contributed to a marked increase in the frequency of large fires and the total area burned by western wildfires.³ A study of western U.S. ponderosa pine and Douglas fir forests concluded that climate change-related moisture deficits are undermining post-wildfire forest regeneration and recovery there

geoff_morphini

geoff_morphini Avatar

Gender:

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:55pm

kurtster wrote:

In the case of the Santa Ana Winds, climate change has absolutely nothing to do with them. These winds are the direct result of geographic features only which allow these winds to happen, the same as they have for millennia. And will continue until California falls into the ocean because of the Big One.

Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try.

Prove that Santa Ana Wind intensity and occurrence has not changed over time, cite your sources. CA will not fall into the ocean either.

R_P

Gender:

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:55pm
kurtster wrote: Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try. Nobody claims it explains everything, including how fires get started. It does explain how it will eventually become unmanageable due to frequency and severity, regardless of who's in power.

islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:42pm

kurtster wrote:

In the case of the Santa Ana Winds, climate change has absolutely nothing to do with them. These winds are the direct result of geographic features only which allow these winds to happen, the same as they have for millennia. And will continue until California falls into the ocean because of the Big One.

Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try.

And no matter how hard you try to deny it, there is an impact due to human caused climate change. These changes are making the base problem significantly worse.

U.S. wildfires are being fueled by southwestern North Americaâs driest 22-year period in at least 1,200 years, based on soil water content. Human-caused climate change was responsible for 42% of that soil dryness. ¹
In the western United States human-caused climate change caused more than half the increase in forest fuel aridity (how dry and flammable vegetation is) since the 1970s and has approximately doubled the cumulative area burned in forest fires since 1984.²
Climate change-related declines in western spring snowpack, and increased evaporation from higher temperatures in spring, summer, and fall, have in the decades since the early 1980s reduced moisture and contributed to a marked increase in the frequency of large fires and the total area burned by western wildfires.³ A study of western U.S. ponderosa pine and Douglas fir forests concluded that climate change-related moisture deficits are undermining post-wildfire forest regeneration and recovery there

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:36pm

R_P wrote:

kurtster wrote:

It just ain't gonna change.

For sure if you keep ignoring the elephant in the room.

In the case of the Santa Ana Winds, climate change has absolutely nothing to do with them. These winds are the direct result of geographic features only which allow these winds to happen, the same as they have for millennia. And will continue until California falls into the ocean because of the Big One.

Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try.

R_P

Gender:

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:20pm
kurtster wrote: It just ain't gonna change. For sure if you keep ignoring the elephant in the room.

black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:14pm
kurtster wrote: Y'all realize that this is the same conversation after every fire, right ? Same convo after a shooting, too. This is the textbook definition of insanity. Keep putting the same people in charge and expecting different results. It just ain't gonna change. but if we create a department of fire control, with a budget of $xxx...

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 2:06pm
Y'all realize that this is the same conversation after every fire, right ? Same convo after a shooting, too. This is the textbook definition of insanity. Keep putting the same people in charge and expecting different results. It just ain't gonna change.

black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 12:34pm

haresfur wrote:

The undergrowth and dead material on the ground are the problems. Doesn't take much to get that started.

There are other challenges when it comes to urban areas. Sure, you can say that people should get rid of all the vegetation around their houses but the urban heat island is a real problem between fires. You could use plants that are less prone to burn but they tend to use more water and we don't have enough water. Maybe just cut down all the vegetation in the hills around LA? That's the only thing holding the mud and debris in place. Wait until the next big rains and watch the burned areas flow downhill.

yes, and that season is upon us....too.
Are there are full answers to living in areas prone to wildfires, flooding, tornadoes, earthquakes, cougar attacks...other than don't build there? (which aint happening)

Going to a different area...just wait till this $17M cut in the LAFD budget turns into billions of additional funding going forward.
Every time we have a disaster - 9/11, pandemic, homelessness, floods - the answer's always bigger budgets,, more bureaucracy.

haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 12:27pm

Proclivities wrote:

I'm used to seeing wide "corridors" cut out of the trees for high tension/transmission lines - at least in NY and especially around NC. Granted, those are areas which have been heavily forested since forever, so maybe that's always been the policy. I've been told by several people I know from California and the PNW, that homeowners and landowners in some areas resist having those corridors cut out of the trees because they are unsightly; I don't know if that is actually true. It is my understanding that some of the severe fires which were determined to have been caused by power lines, were ones where arcs or lightning strikes sent burning materials or molten metal to the ground or underbrush, so the presence of a corridor may not have made as much of a difference.

The undergrowth and dead material on the ground are the problems. Doesn't take much to get that started.

There are other challenges when it comes to urban areas. Sure, you can say that people should get rid of all the vegetation around their houses but the urban heat island is a real problem between fires. You could use plants that are less prone to burn but they tend to use more water and we don't have enough water. Maybe just cut down all the vegetation in the hills around LA? That's the only thing holding the mud and debris in place. Wait until the next big rains and watch the burned areas flow downhill.

Isabeau

Isabeau Avatar

Location: sou' tex
Gender: Female

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 11:47am

ScottFromWyoming wrote:

People who move *to* an area with power lines and then complain are in the same category as people who buy a house in the neighborhood of the airport and then complain about noise and traffic.

It's the "Well, if the Developers BUILT here, THEY Must know if it's safe to do so" mindset. Meanwhile people expanding more into woodlands are complaining about those irritating cougars on hiking trails.

ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 9:30am

Proclivities wrote:

Yeah it's easy for power companies to skimp on maintenance when the residents are so hostile... but now PG&E is on the hook for billions and you know the people demanding payment are the same ones who howled about the clearcuts. I think the compromise is to reorganize the grid so that most of the lines run in the same corridors as much as possible but a catastrophic fire would be even greater.

People who move *to* an area with power lines and then complain are in the same category as people who buy a house in the neighborhood of the airport and then complain about noise and traffic.

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 7:34am

islander wrote:

I've seen 10X cost for distribution lines. Transmission lines between substations typically run hundreds of Kilovolts, some run at 1000 KV (a million volts). Air is a great dielectric, and soil not so much. Even less when wet or your conduits are flooded. Air is about 80 times less conductive than pure water (no salts), and soil conductivity would vary by a number of factors, but would be at least that range. So simply managing the distance between conductors to prevent arcing would be a big challenge. And I think heat management would actually be a lot worse - there just isn't a good way to carry heat away from the middle of a conduit. We chased this problem in my old data center and we were dealing with pretty low voltages relatively. It wouldn't surprise me if the cost to bury transmission lines were 50-100X.

islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 15, 2025 - 7:02am

rgio wrote:

I believe there is some, especially in newer communities/areas....but it's really expensive.... like 10X+

haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 14, 2025 - 9:48pm

islander wrote:

Does anyone underground transmission? Heat would be a giant obstacle, but I'd imagine insulation would be a close second.

People have advocated it here but the power company pretty much said it wasn't close to practical. I had to prepare comments for a planned new transmission line and that wasn't really in my remit. Sometimes it is hard to tell when the consultation process is designed to be driven to their desired outcome or whether they are really evaluating possible solutions. In this case, they were probably right in terms of the burial but chose a crappy route and ignored the impacts on agriculture. Interferes with centre pivot irrigation and hard to do aerial spraying with a powerline across your potato field and other issues.

rgio

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male

Posted: Jan 14, 2025 - 6:53pm
islander wrote: Does anyone underground transmission? Heat would be a giant obstacle, but I'd imagine insulation would be a close second. I believe there is some, especially in newer communities/areas....but it's really expensive.... like 10X+

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Jan 14, 2025 - 5:50pm
islander wrote: Does anyone underground transmission? Heat would be a giant obstacle, but I'd imagine insulation would be a close second. Dunno.

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ... 711, 712, 713 Next