• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

2024 Wildfire Season

California and the National Weather Service issued a Red Flag Warning for yesterday. While this is somewhat to be expected and is basically a mobilization order to expect a bad day there was some unique language I've never seen used:

"A Particularly Dangerous Situation". A polite way of saying that extreme conditions are occurring and it is not a normal red flag warning.

Also remember fires are modelled based upon "average" conditions and not extreme due to the lack of information on extreme events. The Fire Behavior Analyst will then try to adjust predictions to align with observed behavior to in turn model future spread. So while I hope this is a one day isolated event unfortunately it looks like the area will be facing a couple of challenging days.

On a more positive note the major fire in Victoria Australia was declared under control today after a couple of weeks of work.
 
California and the National Weather Service issued a Red Flag Warning for yesterday. While this is somewhat to be expected and is basically a mobilization order to expect a bad day there was some unique language I've never seen used:

"A Particularly Dangerous Situation". A polite way of saying that extreme conditions are occurring and it is not a normal red flag warning.

Also remember fires are modelled based upon "average" conditions and not extreme due to the lack of information on extreme events. The Fire Behavior Analyst will then try to adjust predictions to align with observed behavior to in turn model future spread. So while I hope this is a one day isolated event unfortunately it looks like the area will be facing a couple of challenging days.

On a more positive note the major fire in Victoria Australia was declared under control today after a couple of weeks of work.

That isn't good...

Fire hydrants ran dry as Pacific Palisades burned. L.A. city officials blame ‘tremendous demand’​

As wildfires raged across Los Angeles on Tuesday, crews battling the Palisades blaze faced an additional burden: Scores of fire hydrants in Pacific Palisades had little to no water flowing out.

“The hydrants are down,” said one firefighter in internal radio communications.

“Water supply just dropped,” said another.

By 3 a.m. Wednesday, all water storage tanks in the Palisades area “went dry,” diminishing the flow of water from hydrants in higher elevations, said Janisse Quiñones, chief executive and chief engineer of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, the city’s utility.

“We had a tremendous demand on our system in the Palisades. We pushed the system to the extreme,” Quiñones said Wednesday morning. “Four times the normal demand was seen for 15 hours straight, which lowered our water pressure.”

 
Clearly human-driven climate change, not forest mismanagement and general incompetence from governmental and city offices. It’s always the fire fighters on the front lines who pay the price.
 
Thoughts on this one?
Thoguhts:
1) constant off shore/on shore winds daily known as the Santa Anas which cause updrafts/down drafts along the mountain edge. Frankly it's right nasty ground to fight fires in due to winds funneling/slope effects/lack of moisture. Very glad my department at least doesn't deploy there normally.

2) The same mountain fringe is dry ground. It's full of dry grass/chaparral/mesquite brush moving upwards to grass/ponderosa pine forest and eventually the "green" higher elevation forest where enough moisture exists to support the Redwoods/Sequoia forests. This is the ecosystem everyone is building in in part due to land sprawl but also the demand for space.

3) tons of people on challenging terrain, dry fuels, slope and wind means evacuation and suppression is a challenge in these area. Also known as the Wildland Urban Interface and that is where many of the most difficult fires to fight exist. The Camp Fires and Paradise Fires are stories not just in suppression issues but also in blocked evacuation routes at the head of the fire.

4) PG&E - the power utility - has had a long history of maintenance issues. They are not the only company down there but are the dominate player in California...which was partially owned by the state of California too if I recall correctly...and had skimped on some needed work to keep dividend payments up. Add high heat => increase AC demand => power cables stretch => greater line contact with trees and vegetation => more fires => more lawsuits and payments for starting fires => less operating monies.

5) in an attempt to avoid liability for fires under certain conditions PG&E and others will cut power transmission to reduce fire starts. This also occurs in other states (read the Lahina, Hawaii fire report for example) and is starting to show up in Canada. The downside of cutting the grid off is that you then also have folks firing up generators to keep things like freezers cold...and not all those generators are set up well/right and cause different fires.

6) The tangent over logging practices frankly is bad information. From the couple of visits I've been down there logging wasn't going to change anything when you're dealing with LA or San Diego City. For smaller towns scattered in the hills it will help but drought and snowpack are as much drivers as the trees and we could spend a few beers arguing positions for/against things on this front.


7) In regards to the renewables yes California has pushed it heavily....but how else do you expect them to add more capacity to go with increasing populations if they've already maxed out hydro, nuclear is out due to fault lines, and some plants have aged out. Wood Co-gen, hydro imports from British Columbia already exist and adding solar or wind makes sense especially with the Santa Ana winds. Don't get me wrong...I also think they're pushing too far/too fast without investing in the grid infrastructure needed and when I was last in California a couple of years ago they were asking for voluntary use reductions from residents in a heat wave while anticipating double the demand needed if everything went electric. So some kernels of truth in there but also a lot of rhetoric that didn't help the message.

Short answer...it all depends and is complicated.
 
Looks like they used about a thousand cops for this arrest...

To be honest it looks more like a staging area which would also explain the number of fire engines/police either getting briefed on assignments/staff transition/holding patterns. But makes for good video to show that number of people involved.

Arson is always a problem. California also has a lot of fire investigators and was where some of the early investigation techniques were developed that have since been formalized both across Canada, the US and is starting to go further afield internationally (Australia for example). So while arson may be suspected I'll wait until the investigation is fully complete before I'll jump on that train of thought.

It's too easy when doing an investigation to assume it's arson and miss critical evidence in front of your literal nose. Ignition sources such as mechanical part failures, exhaust particles, lightning and mischief (kids playing with matches for example vs. criminal intent to set a fire). But arson is a different matter and is generally a law enforcement discussion once confirmed.
 
4) PG&E - the power utility - has had a long history of maintenance issues. They are not the only company down there but are the dominate player in California...which was partially owned by the state of California too if I recall correctly...and had skimped on some needed work to keep dividend payments up. Add high heat => increase AC demand => power cables stretch => greater line contact with trees and vegetation => more fires => more lawsuits and payments for starting fires => less operating monies.

No, the State of California is not a shareholder of PG&E (or at least not a significant shareholder, if at all) but there are (have been) calls for the state to take them over, usually when the company has gone into bankruptcy protection and been seeking state and/or federal funding to bail them out. That has happened a few times. Not surprisingly, often when they are facing legal action associated with wildfires.
 
Governments which pass legislation that imposes costs on private companies that might reasonably be imposed on public services can expect companies to react by finding ways to reduce costs, particularly if other legislation exists which tends to limit addressing cost-revenue imbalances on the revenue side. Predictable, and predicted.

Cost-saving measures are sometimes risk-increasing measures. This is trivially obvious for costs directly attributable to risk mitigation.

Punitive litigation after the inevitable outcomes from squeezing companies between increasing obligations (costs) and limited revenue-increasing measures exacerbates cost-revenue imbalances.

Decades of this kind of governance can reasonably be expected to occasionally produce major and critical catastrophes.

Next up will be a deepening of the already developing crisis of insurance. Companies have already been exiting California markets because of ham-fisted government fiats, and the latest dog in the pile is the recently imposed moratorium on cancellations and non-renewals in the fire-affected areas. If the state and local governments aren't going to demonstrate that they are serious about maintaining public infrastructure and services adequate to need and the state hinders insurance companies from eschewing uninsurable risks, companies will exit markets entirely as soon as they can - they can't be locked in place forever.
 
Some Hollywood style drama.

LA fire chief Kristin Crowley was called into the mayor's office to be fired. Ended up walking away telling her staff she wasn't fired "yet".

Their meeting came after Crowley lashed out against the Mayor's cuts to her department, in an interview with a local Fox TV station around 12pm Friday.

'My message is the fire department needs to be properly funded,' the Chief said. 'It's not.'

'Did they fail you?' Fox LA's Gigi Graciette asked. 'Yes,' Crowley replied.
 
Last edited:

Chester Griffiths finished performing brain surgery, climbed into his car and drove across Los Angeles to save his beachfront Malibu home from the wildfires raging around the city.

It was a scenario the 62-year-old had been preparing for years: he had done the training, sourced the fire hoses, and briefed his son and next-door neighbour about the course of action.

Now was the time to put it into practice.

What followed was a daring mission that saw the three men confront the worst inferno in the city’s history to successfully protect six homes in their picturesque cul-de-sac, while houses around them crumbled into a mess of ash and rubble.

As the Pacific Palisades fire worsened, swallowing up thousands of homes and leaving trails of smouldering ruins across thousands of acres, the men refused to back down.

Even as 80mph hurricane-level winds brought sheets of embers the size of footballs raining down, they continued to fight.

“At one point I started packing up my car and then I just decided I’m just not gonna let my house burn down, no matter what”, Clayton Colbert, Dr Griffiths’s neighbour, told The Telegraph.

Armed with N95 face masks, fire hoses and spades, the trio managed to keep the inferno at bay for four days and five nights.

So this chap sets up his own neighbourhood volunteer fire service. Masks, turnout gear, 1.5 to 2" hoses. The whole nine yards.

But, I ask, where did he get the water given the dry fire hydrants in the area.

The answer, I suspect, is in the picture below. Hoses across the beach to the Pacific Ocean.


1736642082728.png

I now expect him to be slapped with an environment fine for using salt water ....

....

Local fire service was not authorizing salt water drops on the fires despite having suitable water bombers because of the impact of all that salt on the ground after the fire.

...

PS - his escape plan was over the beach to paddle boards.
 
Looks like they used about a thousand cops for this arrest...


I wonder if it is related to this guy ...

1736644785760.png


Except he was arrested by the citizenry with a blowtorch in his hands, cuffed with zip ties, and then turned over to the local constabulary who then declined to charge him with arson due to lack of probable cause. They did detain him on probation violation.

“What we know right now is that the incident occurred here and about 20-30 minutes later, a suspect was detained by citizens,” Sean Dinse, from the Los Angeles Police Department’s Topanga Division, told US media, adding that the man was arrested five miles from where the fire is believed to have started.

When asked whether the Kenneth fire was started deliberately, Mr Dinse said: “At this time, that’s what we believe. It’s being investigated as a crime.”

Witnesses said the man was riding a bicycle and trying to set fire to garbage cans and discarded Christmas trees, a Los Angeles Fox affiliate said.

It was then that the concerned residents saw the man and chased him down.

Ms Grinshpun told KTLA: “We were sitting in the backyard and suddenly, we hear a car come to a screeching halt, and the guy is running out saying, ‘Stop! Drop what you’re holding! Neighbours, he’s trying to start a fire! Call 911!’

“He was very, like, ‘I can’t stop. I can’t stop. I’m not putting this down. I’m doing this,’” another witness said, according to the station. “And very focused on moving forward with the blow torch. And we’re like, ‘We can’t be doing that right now’.”

Ms Grinshpun said the locals all banded together as a group. She said: “A few gentlemen surrounded him and got him on his knees. They got some zip ties, a rope, and we were able to do a citizen’s arrest.”

The incident occurred around five miles from the start of the Kenneth fire.

By 7pm on Friday, the fire had burned through more than 1,000 acres and had reached 35 per cent containment.
 
Sounds like they were about to cut another $49M.

Read something about the insurance companies cutting coverage because of the government.
They can't "cut coverage" just to get out of paying claims. In California a policy can be cancelled for things like missed premiums, but not just because the underwriter wants to - insurers have to carry policies to end of term. They can choose to not renew, or change options for coverage (eg. less generous coverages and higher premiums) on renewal.

Requirements imposed by the California state government are cited as reasons why some insurers are leaving the market or cutting back coverage options, and claim cost increases are undeniably a factor (more claims, higher costs to repair and replace homes). Insurers aren't going to hang around to be plucked any more than retail businesses will hang around to be shoplifted into deficit (businesses covering the costs of retail theft out of their sales amounts to self-insurance). Governments that think they can short-fund public safety and force private companies to absorb costs are in a FAFO situation of their own making.

Some situations are essentially uninsurable (unless the insured is prepared to pay whatever premiums are demanded). Think of areas prone to frequent flooding, severe storms, high crime, wildfire.

I see on the news that they are determined to enforce "no price gouging" policies, which are just price controls. They remove the incentive for entrepreneurs to work harder to bring emergency supplies into an emergency zone and then whine when the stock on hand quickly runs out and is not readily replaced at any level commensurate with demand. I understand their moral outrage, but a public welfare emergency is a "do what works" situation.
 
Back
Top