Don't believe everything you see or hear.... California wildfires
Nov 3, 2019 15:51:40 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
However you get your news, it certainly sounds bad for California, doesn't it?
"California wildfires signal the arrival of a planetary fire age" PBS, November 2, 2019.
"At least 13 wildfires are burning in California" CNN, November 2, 2019.
"PG&E and Southern California Edison have turned off power to minimize fires. It hasn't worked." USA Today, November 1, 2019.
"It seems like every year these fires get more deadly and more destructive." CNN, October 29, 2019.
"Trump stymies California climate efforts even as the state burns." New York Times, November 2, 2019.
"With raging fires, high winds and blackouts, California is living a disaster movie. Is this the 'new normal'?" USA Today, October 31, 2019.
"California wildfires will cost tens of billions, AccuWeather estimates" UPI, November 3, 2019.
"California wildfires: Utility customers will have to pay more." Los Angeles Times, October 28, 2019.
"California wildfires leave destruction across the state." The Guardian, October 28, 2019.
"What's driving the historic California high-wind events, and worsening the wildfires?" "Evidence continues to mount that climate change is worsening their effects." The Washington Post, October 28, 2019.
"Rich people hire private firefighters to tackle blazes" The Independent, November 1, 2019.
"Wildfire season is here to stay" "Californians face a terrrible new normal as wildfire season grows longer and more intense." NPR, October 28, 2019.
"California wildfires:unprecedented 'extreme red flag warning' issued as blazes spread" The Guardian, October 30, 2019.
There are dozens more such headlines and news blurbs.
But every so often some real news almost squeaks through:
"California wildfires: Losses have been lower than in past 2 years - but season is far from over." KTLA, November 2, 2019.
Actually, out of the last 20 years, so far 2019 has been the third least severe wildfire year. Of course, that could change because we still need some good soaking rains and snow in the high country to finally put an end to this year's fire season. Unfortunately there's no precipitation predicted in the immediate future, so things could get worse. We hope they don't and that we'll see the end of the fire season soon.
And, even in a mild fire season like this one (so far) there are a lot of tragedies and losses. Last year and the year before were horrendous. 2003, 2007 and 2008 were, too. But even small fires can be deadly and cause property loses.
HOWEVER, you'd think it was a whole lot worse than it actually is, based on what you see and hear from the media and from politicians pushing their own agendas. Reread those headlines above... And that's just a small sampling!
Actual California Wildfire data:
2019 (YTD thru Oct. 27)... 198,815 acres... 6190 fires..... 3 fatalities
2018 (whole year)......... 1,893,813 acres... 8527 fires... 103 fatalities
2017 (whole year)......... 1,381,405 acres... 9133 fires.... 47 fatalities
2016 (whole year)........... 669,534 acres... 7349 fires..... 8 fatalities
2015 (whole year)........... 893,362 acres... 8745 fires..... 9 fatalities
2014 (whole year)........... 625,540 acres... 7865 fires..... 2 fatalities
2013 (whole year)........... 601,635 acres... 9907 fires..... 1 fatality
2012 (whole year)........... 869,599 acres... 7950 fires..... 0 fatalities
2011 (whole year)........... 168,545 acres... 7989 fires..... 0 fatalities
2010 (whole year)........... 109,529 acres... 6554 fires..... 0 fatalities
2009 (whole year)........... 422,147 acres... 9159 fires..... 4 fatalities
2008 (whole year)......... 1,593,690 acres... 4923 fires.... 32 fatalities
2007 (whole year)......... 1,520,362 acges... 9093 fires.... 17 fatalities
2006 (whole year)........... 736,022 acres... 8202 fires..... 9 fatalities
2005 (whole year)........... 225,538 acres... 7162 fires..... 1 fatality
2004 (whole year)........... 311,024 acres... 7898 fires..... 2 fatalities
2003 (whole year)......... 1,020,460 acres... 9116 fires.... 25 fatalities
2002 (whole year)........... 969,890 acres... 8328 fires..... 6 fatalities
2001 (whole year)........... 329,126 acres... 9458 fires..... 0 fatalities
2000 (whole year)........... 295,026 acres... 7622 fires..... 3 fatalities
Above information is compiled by the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), which was established in 2001 in Boise, Idaho. Fatalities include both firefighters and civilians. Fatalities include any and all deaths attributed to the fire, including indirect causes such as vehicle and aircraft accidents, as well as other causes. Structures damaged/destroyed and estimate of costs are other measures, but aren't included due to different methods of compiling data that cause a lot of disparity among various sources.
On a related note, California's Governor Gavin Newsom (ultra-lib Democrat) is threatening a state take-over of PG&E, our already-highly-government-regulated gas and electric utility company in N. Calif., following their bankruptcy as a result of all the lawsuits stemming from major 2017 and 2018 fires traced to electric grid faults. Keep in mind that PG&E serves around 5 million electric customer accounts (close to 16 million people) with over 125,000 miles of power lines in an area of 70,000 square miles. Does anyone really think government can do a better job running things? Meanwhile President Trump (conservative Republican) is Tweeting a threat to withhold federal funds for firefighting, due to the way Calif. has mismanaged the environment and re-directed monies the state could have been used for fire risk reduction into various questionable anti climate-change initiatives. Neither of these seem like very good approaches to the problems.
The wide spread power blackouts this year that Newsom is reacting to are definitely an inconvenience. They even can be dangerous, knocking out street lighting and traffic signals, cutting off power that some rely upon for medical needs, trapping people with limited mobility, as well as shutting down phone, Internet and other forms of communications... including emergency notifications. Perhaps PG&E and Edison (S. Calif.) handled it poorly and gave insufficient notification of the larger than usual planned power outages, but there can be little doubt they prevented some fires. But there are an estimated 300 to 500 wildfires per year caused by faulty power line equipment.
Those of us who live in rural areas with high risk are already accustomed to occasional power cutoffs. I get notifications of impending outages from PG&E as texts on my phone, for my property in a rather fire-risky area of the Sierra foothills. Last year I got about eight or a dozen such notices and the power outages usually only lasted a day or less. This year's fire season, I haven't received a notification yet.
Insurance companies estimate that 4.5 million households in the U.S. are at "high" or "extreme" risk of wildfire. With it's huge population and high-cost urban areas forcing more and more people to live "out on the fringes", over 2 million of those high/extreme risk households are in California alone, making it by the numbers the far the worst state in the nation. (Montana with 28% and Idaho with 26% of households at high/extreme risk, each have a higher percentage than California. However, those states' much smaller populations mean the actual numbers of high/extreme risk households are Montana: about 120,000 and Idaho: approx. 166,000. Far less than the approx. 2 million, or 15% of California's 13 million households.)
I think the unusual breadth of the outages this year surprised a lot of people, but I wasn't one of them. PG&E learned some really hard lessons from last year's Camp Fire, which burned over 150,000 acres, destroyed nearly 19,000 structures, including wiping out almost the entire town of Paradise, and became the deadliest wildfire in California history killing 85 people. The Tubbs Fire in 2017, also in PG&E service area and attributed to electrical system faults, was the second most destructive fire in Calif. history, destroying 5636 structures and burning 36,807 acres... as well as the fourth deadliest fire with 22 people killed. (Incidentally, California's second deadliest was the Griffith Park Fire in 1933 in Los Angeles County, which only burned 47 acres and no structures, but killed 29 people. The third deadliest was the Tunnel Fire in 1991, in the densely populated Oakland foothills, burning 1600 acres, destroying 2900 structures and killing 25 people.)
So two of the most destructive/deadliest fires in California history have occurred in the past two years.... and both were ultimately blamed on PG&E's electrical system. They're liable for the losses of life and property, hence the bankruptcy protections they've filed for. And now the threat of a state government takeover of the utility. Seriously, is it any wonder that PG&E is "playing it safe" by shutting off all the at-risk electrical grid they can? What would a state-owned utility do differently? Leave the power on and let the fires happen? Would a California-owned utility do a better job inspecting 125,000 miles of wires and be more effective and efficient with preventative maintenance?
When I bought my place in the Sierra Foothills, I noticed a tree branch much nearer a power line than I liked. I contacted PG&E and they had a crew out to safely trim the branch back the next day... at no charge to me.
Add to all this the fact that wildfire is a natural occurrence in much of the California environment. Some plants here, including the majestic redwood tree, cannot even germinate without fire. In order to open and disseminate it's seeds, a redwood pine cone (which is amazingly tiny for such a large tree), must be exposed to the heat of a fire.
It's also starting to dawn on people that California is mismanaging our forests and brush lands. Our extensive efforts geared to "prevention" are actually causing the fire fuel load to build up to dangerous levels that, in turn, cause any fire to grow much faster and far larger than they have historically. Some of the least fire-prone areas are native American lands that have been managed with careful, prescribed burns and other efforts to reduce fuel and help the environment regenerate and "fight fires" in a natural way.
For the record... I do believe that human beings have an impact on their environment, up to and including the climate. But I also think there's a lot of stupidity and overreaction. I remain very skeptical whenever I hear extreme alarmism, such as the wildfire news this year... Or whenever I'm told that throwing more tax dollars at it will solve a problem! Or when someone tells me that government intervention is the fix! I'm prone to go look for info such as the above, to try to get a clearer and more accurate picture of what's going on. I can't trust what I see, hear and read in the media (worked for newspapers for 21 years!) or am told by the politicians!
I'm getting off my soapbox now....
Cheers from Sunny California!
"California wildfires signal the arrival of a planetary fire age" PBS, November 2, 2019.
"At least 13 wildfires are burning in California" CNN, November 2, 2019.
"PG&E and Southern California Edison have turned off power to minimize fires. It hasn't worked." USA Today, November 1, 2019.
"It seems like every year these fires get more deadly and more destructive." CNN, October 29, 2019.
"Trump stymies California climate efforts even as the state burns." New York Times, November 2, 2019.
"With raging fires, high winds and blackouts, California is living a disaster movie. Is this the 'new normal'?" USA Today, October 31, 2019.
"California wildfires will cost tens of billions, AccuWeather estimates" UPI, November 3, 2019.
"California wildfires: Utility customers will have to pay more." Los Angeles Times, October 28, 2019.
"California wildfires leave destruction across the state." The Guardian, October 28, 2019.
"What's driving the historic California high-wind events, and worsening the wildfires?" "Evidence continues to mount that climate change is worsening their effects." The Washington Post, October 28, 2019.
"Rich people hire private firefighters to tackle blazes" The Independent, November 1, 2019.
"Wildfire season is here to stay" "Californians face a terrrible new normal as wildfire season grows longer and more intense." NPR, October 28, 2019.
"California wildfires:unprecedented 'extreme red flag warning' issued as blazes spread" The Guardian, October 30, 2019.
There are dozens more such headlines and news blurbs.
But every so often some real news almost squeaks through:
"California wildfires: Losses have been lower than in past 2 years - but season is far from over." KTLA, November 2, 2019.
Actually, out of the last 20 years, so far 2019 has been the third least severe wildfire year. Of course, that could change because we still need some good soaking rains and snow in the high country to finally put an end to this year's fire season. Unfortunately there's no precipitation predicted in the immediate future, so things could get worse. We hope they don't and that we'll see the end of the fire season soon.
And, even in a mild fire season like this one (so far) there are a lot of tragedies and losses. Last year and the year before were horrendous. 2003, 2007 and 2008 were, too. But even small fires can be deadly and cause property loses.
HOWEVER, you'd think it was a whole lot worse than it actually is, based on what you see and hear from the media and from politicians pushing their own agendas. Reread those headlines above... And that's just a small sampling!
Actual California Wildfire data:
2019 (YTD thru Oct. 27)... 198,815 acres... 6190 fires..... 3 fatalities
2018 (whole year)......... 1,893,813 acres... 8527 fires... 103 fatalities
2017 (whole year)......... 1,381,405 acres... 9133 fires.... 47 fatalities
2016 (whole year)........... 669,534 acres... 7349 fires..... 8 fatalities
2015 (whole year)........... 893,362 acres... 8745 fires..... 9 fatalities
2014 (whole year)........... 625,540 acres... 7865 fires..... 2 fatalities
2013 (whole year)........... 601,635 acres... 9907 fires..... 1 fatality
2012 (whole year)........... 869,599 acres... 7950 fires..... 0 fatalities
2011 (whole year)........... 168,545 acres... 7989 fires..... 0 fatalities
2010 (whole year)........... 109,529 acres... 6554 fires..... 0 fatalities
2009 (whole year)........... 422,147 acres... 9159 fires..... 4 fatalities
2008 (whole year)......... 1,593,690 acres... 4923 fires.... 32 fatalities
2007 (whole year)......... 1,520,362 acges... 9093 fires.... 17 fatalities
2006 (whole year)........... 736,022 acres... 8202 fires..... 9 fatalities
2005 (whole year)........... 225,538 acres... 7162 fires..... 1 fatality
2004 (whole year)........... 311,024 acres... 7898 fires..... 2 fatalities
2003 (whole year)......... 1,020,460 acres... 9116 fires.... 25 fatalities
2002 (whole year)........... 969,890 acres... 8328 fires..... 6 fatalities
2001 (whole year)........... 329,126 acres... 9458 fires..... 0 fatalities
2000 (whole year)........... 295,026 acres... 7622 fires..... 3 fatalities
Above information is compiled by the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), which was established in 2001 in Boise, Idaho. Fatalities include both firefighters and civilians. Fatalities include any and all deaths attributed to the fire, including indirect causes such as vehicle and aircraft accidents, as well as other causes. Structures damaged/destroyed and estimate of costs are other measures, but aren't included due to different methods of compiling data that cause a lot of disparity among various sources.
On a related note, California's Governor Gavin Newsom (ultra-lib Democrat) is threatening a state take-over of PG&E, our already-highly-government-regulated gas and electric utility company in N. Calif., following their bankruptcy as a result of all the lawsuits stemming from major 2017 and 2018 fires traced to electric grid faults. Keep in mind that PG&E serves around 5 million electric customer accounts (close to 16 million people) with over 125,000 miles of power lines in an area of 70,000 square miles. Does anyone really think government can do a better job running things? Meanwhile President Trump (conservative Republican) is Tweeting a threat to withhold federal funds for firefighting, due to the way Calif. has mismanaged the environment and re-directed monies the state could have been used for fire risk reduction into various questionable anti climate-change initiatives. Neither of these seem like very good approaches to the problems.
The wide spread power blackouts this year that Newsom is reacting to are definitely an inconvenience. They even can be dangerous, knocking out street lighting and traffic signals, cutting off power that some rely upon for medical needs, trapping people with limited mobility, as well as shutting down phone, Internet and other forms of communications... including emergency notifications. Perhaps PG&E and Edison (S. Calif.) handled it poorly and gave insufficient notification of the larger than usual planned power outages, but there can be little doubt they prevented some fires. But there are an estimated 300 to 500 wildfires per year caused by faulty power line equipment.
Those of us who live in rural areas with high risk are already accustomed to occasional power cutoffs. I get notifications of impending outages from PG&E as texts on my phone, for my property in a rather fire-risky area of the Sierra foothills. Last year I got about eight or a dozen such notices and the power outages usually only lasted a day or less. This year's fire season, I haven't received a notification yet.
Insurance companies estimate that 4.5 million households in the U.S. are at "high" or "extreme" risk of wildfire. With it's huge population and high-cost urban areas forcing more and more people to live "out on the fringes", over 2 million of those high/extreme risk households are in California alone, making it by the numbers the far the worst state in the nation. (Montana with 28% and Idaho with 26% of households at high/extreme risk, each have a higher percentage than California. However, those states' much smaller populations mean the actual numbers of high/extreme risk households are Montana: about 120,000 and Idaho: approx. 166,000. Far less than the approx. 2 million, or 15% of California's 13 million households.)
I think the unusual breadth of the outages this year surprised a lot of people, but I wasn't one of them. PG&E learned some really hard lessons from last year's Camp Fire, which burned over 150,000 acres, destroyed nearly 19,000 structures, including wiping out almost the entire town of Paradise, and became the deadliest wildfire in California history killing 85 people. The Tubbs Fire in 2017, also in PG&E service area and attributed to electrical system faults, was the second most destructive fire in Calif. history, destroying 5636 structures and burning 36,807 acres... as well as the fourth deadliest fire with 22 people killed. (Incidentally, California's second deadliest was the Griffith Park Fire in 1933 in Los Angeles County, which only burned 47 acres and no structures, but killed 29 people. The third deadliest was the Tunnel Fire in 1991, in the densely populated Oakland foothills, burning 1600 acres, destroying 2900 structures and killing 25 people.)
So two of the most destructive/deadliest fires in California history have occurred in the past two years.... and both were ultimately blamed on PG&E's electrical system. They're liable for the losses of life and property, hence the bankruptcy protections they've filed for. And now the threat of a state government takeover of the utility. Seriously, is it any wonder that PG&E is "playing it safe" by shutting off all the at-risk electrical grid they can? What would a state-owned utility do differently? Leave the power on and let the fires happen? Would a California-owned utility do a better job inspecting 125,000 miles of wires and be more effective and efficient with preventative maintenance?
When I bought my place in the Sierra Foothills, I noticed a tree branch much nearer a power line than I liked. I contacted PG&E and they had a crew out to safely trim the branch back the next day... at no charge to me.
Add to all this the fact that wildfire is a natural occurrence in much of the California environment. Some plants here, including the majestic redwood tree, cannot even germinate without fire. In order to open and disseminate it's seeds, a redwood pine cone (which is amazingly tiny for such a large tree), must be exposed to the heat of a fire.
It's also starting to dawn on people that California is mismanaging our forests and brush lands. Our extensive efforts geared to "prevention" are actually causing the fire fuel load to build up to dangerous levels that, in turn, cause any fire to grow much faster and far larger than they have historically. Some of the least fire-prone areas are native American lands that have been managed with careful, prescribed burns and other efforts to reduce fuel and help the environment regenerate and "fight fires" in a natural way.
For the record... I do believe that human beings have an impact on their environment, up to and including the climate. But I also think there's a lot of stupidity and overreaction. I remain very skeptical whenever I hear extreme alarmism, such as the wildfire news this year... Or whenever I'm told that throwing more tax dollars at it will solve a problem! Or when someone tells me that government intervention is the fix! I'm prone to go look for info such as the above, to try to get a clearer and more accurate picture of what's going on. I can't trust what I see, hear and read in the media (worked for newspapers for 21 years!) or am told by the politicians!
I'm getting off my soapbox now....
Cheers from Sunny California!
Nov 3, 2019 15:55:54 #
Nov 3, 2019 15:58:28 #
So much of the news today, is of an alarmist variety. I still hate to hear of disasters though.l hope you and others stay safe.
Nov 3, 2019 16:05:33 #
vonzip wrote:
That goes now for most anything on the news. They love to post drama. vz
Nov 3, 2019 16:05:46 #
Bob Mevis wrote:
So much of the news today, is of an alarmist variety. I still hate to hear of disasters though.l hope you and others stay safe.
Listen to the way they deliver the news.
Nov 3, 2019 16:14:28 #
xt2
Loc: British Columbia, Canada
“Fake news @ its best... Really, what outlet in America can you actually believe will provide an unbiased perspective?
Nov 3, 2019 16:21:28 #
Longshadow wrote:
Listen to the way they deliver the news.
Listen to the way they deliver the news.
I was a welder for 30 years. I've had hundreds of burns. In 95 I burnt my lower left leg to the bone. In 2000, I went to the emergency room, begging them to amputate that leg. I was told that I wouldn't survive the operation and, to go home and die in my own bed because I would' nd live to see the sun come up the next morning. Of course, I did. Overheard the nurses saying that the Dr. had already filled out my death certificate. I walked out 2 days later.
I still have both of my legs. My point is, I hate hearing somebody dying by fire. I am just glad, that people have lived in your area. So f------ the news.
Nov 3, 2019 16:22:02 #
Thanks for this. You just have to ask yourself when you read/watch these "news" reports. IS THE SKY REALLY FALLING OR IS THE DRAMA MAKING SOMEONE MONEY
Nov 3, 2019 16:27:16 #
xt2 wrote:
“Fake news @ its best... Really, what outlet in America can you actually believe will provide an unbiased perspective?
I believe.... None. I have a news app on my phone, AND, I don't believe much of it either.
Nov 3, 2019 16:28:12 #
Retired CPO wrote:
Thanks for this. You just have to ask yourself when you read/watch these "news" reports. IS THE SKY REALLY FALLING OR IS THE DRAMA MAKING SOMEONE MONEY
Indeed! It's all about getting the ratings. vz
Nov 3, 2019 16:32:24 #
vonzip wrote:
Indeed! It's all about getting the ratings. vz
Nov 3, 2019 16:57:25 #
OneShot1
Loc: Wichita, KS, USA
I'm not surprised. Why do people even listen/watch the "mainstream media"?
Nov 3, 2019 17:17:56 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
Last year's California wildfires was a wake up call. Fatalities beyond belief. Many were trapped on roads attempting to evacuate, and burned to death inside their vehicles. Many, just flat refused to evacuate and burned up inside their homes. Those that did survive last year's fires and lost their homes, did rebuild their homes by insurance claims. Only, to be told that their insurance will not be renewable in a fire zone. Bad news. California's strict environmental policies, going back to Governor Brown, and continuing with Governor Gavin Newsom, share some of the blame too..
Nov 3, 2019 21:38:28 #
Let us not get into the politics. There is possibly some "fake news," but, what you relate is the overinterpretation ovedramatization, not the production of false, aka fake, news. It is like alternative facts versus real facts! There are serious wild fires, they are destroying vast expanses of forests and housing. The earth has had wild fires since the earth was born. That is true, but it is also true that in this age, the dangers and damages are far greater than before.
Nov 4, 2019 00:28:19 #
xt2
Loc: British Columbia, Canada
toxdoc42 wrote:
Let us not get into the politics. There is possibly some "fake news," but, what you relate is the overinterpretation ovedramatization, not the production of false, aka fake, news. It is like alternative facts versus real facts! There are serious wild fires, they are destroying vast expanses of forests and housing. The earth has had wild fires since the earth was born. That is true, but it is also true that in this age, the dangers and damages are far greater than before.
Politics, politics...yup this has happened before, sometimes worse sometimes not. Remember, there has been an ice age and another one coming. We mortals are a far cry from inhibiting nature’s cycles. Having said that, humanity has an obligation to mitigate what they can.
Cheers!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.