Hits keep coming

10,448 Views | 47 Replies | Last: 8 yr ago by wifeisafurd
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Being a Cal fan and Cal resident, you sorta have that hang dog look. The hits just seem to keep coming. Looking forward to a better 2018.

Now it is SoCal's time to burn. For those that recall the football signing events at our old house and Mountaingate, CC, both are in jeopardy, and the 405 is closed, creating the world's largest traffic jam. Other area (Ventura County, near La Canada, Riverside County, etc.) are also in trouble. Be safe everyone.
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WIF, as a Napa Valley resident I feel your pain. Those threatened by the SoCal fires are in our thoughts and prayers!
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not a fire expert here, so maybe someone else can chime in. What is the percent likelihood that these fires are intentionally set? 1%? 25%?
sp4149
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

Not a fire expert here, so maybe someone else can chime in. What is the percent likelihood that these fires are intentionally set? 1%? 25%?
Intent is probably hard to determine, especially given that resources are spread so far apart at the moment.
But there haven't been lightening strikes or thunder storms for quite awhile so probably close to 100% that these fires are due to human activity. We just had a small fire started by a guy who got lost in the woods so he started a fire to get rescued. Seems to happen quite often in SoCal. I guess that fire would be intentionally set, even if the real intent was to get rescued when lost in the woods.

The San Diego stations have been talking about the extreme fire danger for over a week now. It is no surprise that the fires are occurring. However so far no fires in San Diego area. That in itself is surprising. Some forecasts for the next couple of days have wind gusts up to 70-90 miles an hour, probably the worst fire conditions of the year. But there has been no major shutdown of human activity in the back country so the unintentional fire danger remains. Still with such publicity, the arsonists are certainly aware of the opportunity. We will be lucky to stay fire free through the weekend.

The timing of these fires has to be make arson investigators suspicious. Many of these fires have started at night when human activity is at it's lowest, when surveillance may be the most difficult and when the winds are highest and temperatures are the lowest. Simply the best time of day to start a fire when the humidity is in single digits.

This is pruning season in much of the state; when we had an orchard we could only burn the prunings when it was cold, damp, windless and wet. Under those conditions starting a fire early in the morning was a challenge. But I learned how because there was no alternative. So Cal has been having cold overnight temperatures, Homeless or migrant worker camps may have needed to warm up at the coldest part of the day and lost control of a campfire. Human activity is the most likely cause.
sp4149
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
Consider the factor that the fire fighting aircraft have been grounded at time due to the high winds, having more aircraft on the ground doesn't help fight the fires. Insurance companies are adept at adjusting rates due to increased claims. A private fleet of aircraft not under the command of the incident commander would not be allowed to fly in the fire zone. I can't see insurance companies being receptive to the idea.
socaliganbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Our family home is about 5 minutes south east of the Getty. Pretty close to home.
sp4149
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaliganbear said:

Our family home is about 5 minutes south east of the Getty. Pretty close to home.
We had a fire 5 miles east (in Chula Vista) earlier this year, but fortunately without Santa Ana winds. Happens every couple of years. So far we have been lucky (rather than good), only evacuated once in 18 years. Floods are far worse, water even stops fires; water is much harder to control.

Fire prevention is much harder to achieve than most realize. There are urban areas where the adjacent open areas cannot be mowed or brush cut or have fire breaks because of safety or environmental concerns. The problem was that houses were built years ago and there was no provision to have a defensible space around the residences. Some of these areas have live ordinance, so a fire in those open areas could be quite interesting.

I happen to live next to an open area maintained by the city. The open area does not meet the fire prevention criteria for a defensible space; so it could fuel a fire right into my house. I have in the past wondered what would be my liability if I maintained a defensible space on city property (irrigated, but not pruned regularly). This year I have noticed an increased vegetation dieback on city open spaces, in some areas over 50% of large trees and shrubs. In the past I have taken action on single trees which have died or broken apart on the fence line, cutting them up with a chain saw. Wood on the ground is much harder to burn than wood above the ground; standing dead vegetation is the major threat.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
Thank goodness those six letters were blocked out!
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sp4149 said:

burritos said:

Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
Consider the factor that the fire fighting aircraft have been grounded at time due to the high winds, having more aircraft on the ground doesn't help fight the fires. Insurance companies are adept at adjusting rates due to increased claims. A private fleet of aircraft not under the command of the incident commander would not be allowed to fly in the fire zone. I can't see insurance companies being receptive to the idea.
Ultimately it's a numbers game. Is the hassle/costs/hoops to maintain a ready fleet if not privately then bolstering via a public unit>> or << than paying out fire claims that might have been snuffed out early on with a ready fleet?

I'm not an accountant/actuary/city manager/insurance CEO/FEMA regional coordinator/Fire Battalion chief/Mayor/Governor/regional BLM manager/seller of decommissioned planes and helicopters but to me seems like a fun thought game.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
On that very subject, one of my buddies who lives in Napa said his neighbor's home owners insurance carrier called the neighbor during the fires and told him they were sending a crew over. Shortly thereafter men showed up and laid chemical foam all over the property. His house was saved. I guess that carrier crunched the numbers and figured it was cheaper to outlay for these preventative measures than to rebuild the home. Wave of the future?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention

“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
sp4149
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

sp4149 said:

burritos said:

Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
Consider the factor that the fire fighting aircraft have been grounded at time due to the high winds, having more aircraft on the ground doesn't help fight the fires. Insurance companies are adept at adjusting rates due to increased claims. A private fleet of aircraft not under the command of the incident commander would not be allowed to fly in the fire zone. I can't see insurance companies being receptive to the idea.
Ultimately it's a numbers game. Is the hassle/costs/hoops to maintain a ready fleet if not privately then bolstering via a public unit>> or << than paying out fire claims that might have been snuffed out early on with a ready fleet?

I'm not an accountant/actuary/city manager but to me seems like a fun thought game.
There is a ready fleet already fully manned. However it cannot fly at night or in high winds. That was a major problem in fighting fires that start in high winds in the middle of the night. What is needed is not more planes on the ground but a new means of fighting fires when the planes are grounded.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sp4149 said:

burritos said:

sp4149 said:

burritos said:

Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
Consider the factor that the fire fighting aircraft have been grounded at time due to the high winds, having more aircraft on the ground doesn't help fight the fires. Insurance companies are adept at adjusting rates due to increased claims. A private fleet of aircraft not under the command of the incident commander would not be allowed to fly in the fire zone. I can't see insurance companies being receptive to the idea.
Ultimately it's a numbers game. Is the hassle/costs/hoops to maintain a ready fleet if not privately then bolstering via a public unit>> or << than paying out fire claims that might have been snuffed out early on with a ready fleet?

I'm not an accountant/actuary/city manager but to me seems like a fun thought game.
There is a ready fleet already fully manned. However it cannot fly at night or in high winds. That was a major problem in fighting fires that start in high winds in the middle of the night. What is needed is not more planes on the ground but a new means of fighting fires when the planes are grounded.
Good point. One(as I do) could assume that all is being done to mitigate fire damage and no amount of additional assets could alter the outcome. But from a purely bottom line hypothetical, could $50 million dollars of whatever(not necessarily airplanes) mitigate a billion dollars worth of claims? Note, I'm not arguing for the sake of protecting people's property, that is totally secondary. It's a cold cost/benefit query.
510 Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Good Lord, this is scary. LINK to footage
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There are 4 CL415 Canadair water bombers that are leased from Canada during their offseason (mid to late Fall), but none available in CA for the earlier part of the fire season.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

burritos said:

Would it be financially prudent for insurance companies to pool their capital and to man a permanent/seasonally appropriate fleet of water dropping/fire ******ant airships? Cause I'm going to guess that paying out these claims would probably more expensive amortized over time.
On that very subject, one of my buddies who lives in Napa said his neighbor's home owners insurance carrier called the neighbor during the fires and told him they were sending a crew over. Shortly thereafter men showed up and laid chemical foam all over the property. His house was saved. I guess that carrier crunched the numbers and figured it was cheaper to outlay for these preventative measures than to rebuild the home. Wave of the future?
That's bad a s s e s s e d . Was this house saved amidst burned homes that weren't chemically foamed?
sp4149
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

sp4149 said:


There is a ready fleet already fully manned. However it cannot fly at night or in high winds. That was a major problem in fighting fires that start in high winds in the middle of the night. What is needed is not more planes on the ground but a new means of fighting fires when the planes are grounded.
Good point. One(as I do) could assume that all is being done to mitigate fire damage and no amount of additional assets could alter the outcome. But from a purely bottom line hypothetical, could $50 million dollars of whatever(not necessarily airplanes) mitigate a billion dollars worth of claims? Note, I'm not arguing for the sake of protecting people's property, that is totally secondary. It's a cold cost/benefit query.
San Diego Gas and Electric has been fighting major claims for utility lines setting back lands wildfires ten years ago. AS a result of numerous lawsuits the utility has been far more aggressive in reducing their culpability. One current policy ( and easy to implement) is to shut down power lines in areas experiencing dangerous winds. In some areas this means that wells are without power during fire events. However downed and/or sparking power lines will not be starting fires. (FWIW I have not heard how SDG&E prevents wind or solar power generators from dumping power into these lines during fire events). Keeping power lines clear of branches and debris is equally important (and much more expensive). I have no idea if SoCal Edison has similar policies; but this is probably a far greater cost benefit assessment issue. Most people would not want to live in an area of defensible space, pretty stark and barren even if the work is done by their utility company.
bearsandgiants
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mother Nature is a pyromaniac.

Uncle and Cousin both lost their homes yesterday. Fortunately insured but still devastating.
FLC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's not raining, again. Southern CA is bone dry. Whether it is climate change or natural forces what's happening with these huge fires seems to becoming the norm.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Southern California has always been a pretty arid area, but the state as a whole has received a record amount of rainfall this last season, which was the wettest in nearly 100 years.
CAL6371
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I have two friends who are Cal grads and Cal football fans who have lovely homes in the hills in Ventura - their houses have burned to the ground. It is the worst natural disaster in the City of Ventura's history. I live on the level low ground with the rest of the poor and am not in danger unless a tsunami comes in (I live in an officially posted tsunami zone). The air is gray and smells like an ashtray. This is really grim and things are going to get worse with the winds picking up tonight.
BeachedBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

Southern California has always been a pretty arid area, but the state as a whole has received a record amount of rainfall this last season, which was the wettest in nearly 100 years.
My forestry buddies say that is why this is such a bad fire season. One wet season spurred undergrowth/kindling that helped ignite mature trees that are still suffering from years of drought.

At least that's how I understood it.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

Southern California has always been a pretty arid area, but the state as a whole has received a record amount of rainfall this last season, which was the wettest in nearly 100 years.
As a man made paved over cement/asphalt island, most of that water was not resorbed by the soil to restore much of the natural cycles. Fire is mother nature's attempt to cull the human population, but we're too adaptive. Plus we've got insurance as mandated by the mortgage lien holders.
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WIAF my thoughts are with you and yours and for all the affected Bears. Hoping for the best. Spent the day down in Santa Barbara and the air was so thick you could cut it with a knife. Just awful. Some colleagues drove up the 101 last night and showed me pictures of the flames they drove past. They were literally one foot from the road and on both sides. Can't believe the CHP let folks drive on that.
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wifeisafurd said:

Being a Cal fan and Cal resident, you sorta have that hang dog look. The hits just seem to keep coming. Looking forward to a better 2018.

Now it is SoCal's time to burn. For those that recall the football signing events at our old house and Mountaingate, CC, both are in jeopardy, and the 405 is closed, creating the world's largest traffic jam. Other area (Ventura County, near La Canada, Riverside County, etc.) are also in trouble. Be safe everyone.
Is this post supposed to be a summary of 2017 Cal football or about SoCal fires?
We lost to UCLA two weeks ago. What does one have to do with the other?
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

Not a fire expert here, so maybe someone else can chime in. What is the percent likelihood that these fires are intentionally set? 1%? 25%?
My guess is that winds cause both the start and the extent of these modern day urban wildfire disasters.
But there is always a human component.

Like the wealthy folks partying on the Titanic, they didn't create the iceberg or intentionally cause the ship to hit it, but they played a huge part in their own demise by failing to ignore the warnings and the signs.

In a sense, most of modern day civilization is a modern day Titanic and those that really understand where we are headed, like some of those that never even wanted to take the ship off the harbor for that trip, are not seriously listened to, their voices drowned out by those that are economic determinists who think that all human welfare should be determined by the market.

The jet stream is more erratic these days due to, you guessed it, global changes in weather patterns, also known as global climate change. The unintended consequence is more offshore winds, also known as Santa Ana winds. And these winds are happening more often and in more places in California.

If you have trouble understanding how winds can start a bad fire in an urban environment, I can't help you.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskirules said:

wifeisafurd said:

Being a Cal fan and Cal resident, you sorta have that hang dog look. The hits just seem to keep coming. Looking forward to a better 2018.

Now it is SoCal's time to burn. For those that recall the football signing events at our old house and Mountaingate, CC, both are in jeopardy, and the 405 is closed, creating the world's largest traffic jam. Other area (Ventura County, near La Canada, Riverside County, etc.) are also in trouble. Be safe everyone.
Is this post supposed to be a summary of 2017 Cal football or about SoCal fires?
We lost to UCLA two weeks ago. What does one have to do with the other?
Wine Country and other fires, and the related angst re; the WSU game
Cal football fizzles and every day brings another headline about potentially losing another coach
Counzo
Cal basketball is [fill in something that will be censored[
Most non-revenue sports are down
Attendance at Cal events is way down
Tax bill seems to adversely impact most Cali residents
Tax Bill likely kills ESP
Covered California and medical insurance rates in California are going way up thanks, in part, to one large carrier leaving the market, and to Presidential action.
Federal budget meant cuts in UC funding
Calexit
Milo
Cal is fined for being the field a minute too soon (f-u Larry Scott)
SoCal now on fire
Did someone mention locusts?




Chapman_is_Gone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We're also out of coffee.
CannonBlast
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SCE is taking proactive measures to turn off power in high fire/wind areas starting tonight. It's something they've done for a while now, but not on a broad scale. With the types of fires we're seeing nowadays, it's going to happen more often.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

burritos said:

Not a fire expert here, so maybe someone else can chime in. What is the percent likelihood that these fires are intentionally set? 1%? 25%?
My guess is that winds cause both the start and the extent of these modern day urban wildfire disasters.
But there is always a human component.

Like the wealthy folks partying on the Titanic, they didn't create the iceberg or intentionally cause the ship to hit it, but they played a huge part in their own demise by failing to ignore the warnings and the signs.

In a sense, most of modern day civilization is a modern day Titanic and those that really understand where we are headed, like some of those that never even wanted to take the ship off the harbor for that trip, are not seriously listened to, their voices drowned out by those that are economic determinists who think that all human welfare should be determined by the market.

The jet stream is more erratic these days due to, you guessed it, global changes in weather patterns, also known as global climate change. The unintended consequence is more offshore winds, also known as Santa Ana winds. And these winds are happening more often and in more places in California.

If you have trouble understanding how winds can start a bad fire in an urban environment, I can't help you.
Yes you can help me or at least you can try. So you're stating strong winds + incidental low grade sparking from various industrial electrical stuff/cars/industrial machinery and subsequent spread of embers equals 5 large fires all at the same time. If you say that's not only a reasonable explanation but the likely reason, then I'll turn off my conspiratorial detector.

In this day and age where society inadvertently produces mass shooters, I wouldn't be surprised at someone with a strong warped societal grievance use fire as a way to lash out.

I was in California during the 80's and 90's when fires were deliberately being set by a Fire Chief no less:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Leonard_Orr
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Leonard_Orr][/url]
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BTW, thanks everyone for the concern. Today is rather pivotal as unprecedented winds are expected in SoCal. Friday things calm down. Comments about bone dry are dead on.
sp4149
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

heartofthebear said:

burritos said:

Not a fire expert here, so maybe someone else can chime in. What is the percent likelihood that these fires are intentionally set? 1%? 25%?
The jet stream is more erratic these days due to, you guessed it, global changes in weather patterns, also known as global climate change. The unintended consequence is more offshore winds, also known as Santa Ana winds. And these winds are happening more often and in more places in California.

If you have trouble understanding how winds can start a bad fire in an urban environment, I can't help you.
Yes you can help me or at least you can try. So you're stating strong winds + incidental low grade sparking from various industrial electrical stuff/cars/industrial machinery and subsequent spread of embers equals 5 large fires all at the same time. If you say that's not only a reasonable explanation but the likely reason, then I'll turn off my conspiratorial detector.

In this day and age where society inadvertently produces mass shooters, I wouldn't be surprised at someone with a strong warped societal grievance use fire as a way to lash out.

I was in California during the 80's and 90's when fires were deliberately being set by a Fire Chief no less:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Leonard_Orr
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Leonard_Orr][/url]
Since this topic is a booth of a similar thread in Off-Topic, both discussions are incomplete with missing discussions in the other thread. While there have been rogue fire fighters who have set wildfires for the bonus pay; these have always been a small fraction of the wildfire causes. On the West Coast most wildfires will be the result of natural causes like lightening strikes. Even large wildfires this summer caused by lightening garnered little media coverage; probably because the areas were remote and the fires allowed to burn while firefighters protected more populated areas.

The wildfires this week were anticipated; the conditions of extreme fire danger dictated the likelihood. The absence of natural fire starters, e.g. lightening strikes, leaves some sort of man-made ignition source combining with the extreme fire danger conditions as the cause. Fire departments in SoCal put out dozens of fires each day, the fact that maybe five or six fires in a few days grow rapidly due to extreme fire danger that overwhelms fire fighters does not change the fact that fires are a very common occurrence. As I mentioned earlier this week in SoCal a man lost away from a road started a fire to attract attention. He was rescued by fire fighters responding to put out the wildfire he started; they did and the fire did not make the national news. A few years ago SD had a large fire started by lost hunters trying to signal for help. I suspect in some of these areas there are homeless/migrant worker/ illegal alien camps. Nights this week have been very cold, yet building a camp fire to stay warm is extremely dangerous with the extreme winds during the coldest period of the night.

Finally SoCal is a car/truck sanctuary. Not all private/commercial vehicles are well maintained. I had an old pickup truck that had a rear wheel oil seal fail resulting in the bearing melting and welding to the steel axle housing, plenty hot enough to start a grass fire. Ever see disc brake rotors glowing cherry red at night from prolonged braking on grades? In olden times you could downshift and use engine compression to slow a vehicle. With shifting now computer controlled on most cars you cannot manually downshift to use compression braking; result brakes get even hotter. True this only becomes a problem in hilly terrain during extreme fire danger, like where all the fires are burning.

Our family had an orchard/vineyard for nearly 50 years. Annual pruning started in November and had to be complete by Feb 1st. Pruning easily produced a ton per acre and that had to be removed (or burned) by the Feb 1st start of the blooming season. To maintain air quality burning was only allowed on cold wet days without wind, far different than the extreme fire danger conditions current in SoCal. You had to be good to start a fire in those conditions without using fire starters like gasoline and rubber tires. You have to cook the wet wood on a low fire until the wood starts to outgas. Eventually the wood outgases enough combustible fuel and literally will explode like a gasoline fire and the fire instantly is raging. The fire is so hot that wet green wood burns almost instantly when added to the fire. And then you realize what extreme fire danger is really like. Stupid, typical, human behavior during extreme fire conditions will start fires that in less extreme conditions would never spread.

Obviously you have never worked around high voltage power lines or you would not have used the dismissive term, "incidental low grade sparking ". Even the low grade sparking of a wall light switch is enough to ignite vegetation during extreme fire danger conditions (take off the cover plate in a darkened room and watch the sparks). High voltage lines when compromised can produce some spectacular arcing sparks. Even something as flimsy as a curtain rod shorting the poles of a transformer in a substation will blow the transformer and melting metal pieces with an intense arc (welding) event.
San Diego's biggest fires have been started by arcing power lines, lost hikers, dumb hunters, illegal camps, fireworks; actual arsonist caused fires have been smaller. This extreme fire danger event can make anyone a fire starter, no special skills required. In those cases where I know of a fire fighter starting the blaze, the fire danger was not elevated, they were helping mother nature burn...
sp4149
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FWIW, I am amazed that San Diego back country has escaped so far without any out of control wild fires this week. Earlier this year there were several fires that ignited when conditions weren't nearly as extreme as this week. We are very fortunate to have been spared so far. Maybe a steep decline in Border Patrol arrests means less illegal camps in the hills?
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sp4149 said:

burritos said:

heartofthebear said:

burritos said:

Not a fire expert here, so maybe someone else can chime in. What is the percent likelihood that these fires are intentionally set? 1%? 25%?
The jet stream is more erratic these days due to, you guessed it, global changes in weather patterns, also known as global climate change. The unintended consequence is more offshore winds, also known as Santa Ana winds. And these winds are happening more often and in more places in California.

If you have trouble understanding how winds can start a bad fire in an urban environment, I can't help you.
Yes you can help me or at least you can try. So you're stating strong winds + incidental low grade sparking from various industrial electrical stuff/cars/industrial machinery and subsequent spread of embers equals 5 large fires all at the same time. If you say that's not only a reasonable explanation but the likely reason, then I'll turn off my conspiratorial detector.

In this day and age where society inadvertently produces mass shooters, I wouldn't be surprised at someone with a strong warped societal grievance use fire as a way to lash out.

I was in California during the 80's and 90's when fires were deliberately being set by a Fire Chief no less:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Leonard_Orr
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Leonard_Orr][/url]
Since this topic is a booth of a similar thread in Off-Topic, both discussions are incomplete with missing discussions in the other thread. While there have been rogue fire fighters who have set wildfires for the bonus pay; these have always been a small fraction of the wildfire causes. On the West Coast most wildfires will be the result of natural causes like lightening strikes. Even large wildfires this summer caused by lightening garnered little media coverage; probably because the areas were remote and the fires allowed to burn while firefighters protected more populated areas.

The wildfires this week were anticipated; the conditions of extreme fire danger dictated the likelihood. The absence of natural fire starters, e.g. lightening strikes, leaves some sort of man-made ignition source combining with the extreme fire danger conditions as the cause. Fire departments in SoCal put out dozens of fires each day, the fact that maybe five or six fires in a few days grow rapidly due to extreme fire danger that overwhelms fire fighters does not change the fact that fires are a very common occurrence. As I mentioned earlier this week in SoCal a man lost away from a road started a fire to attract attention. He was rescued by fire fighters responding to put out the wildfire he started; they did and the fire did not make the national news. A few years ago SD had a large fire started by lost hunters trying to signal for help. I suspect in some of these areas there are homeless/migrant worker/ illegal alien camps. Nights this week have been very cold, yet building a camp fire to stay warm is extremely dangerous with the extreme winds during the coldest period of the night.

Finally SoCal is a car/truck sanctuary. Not all private/commercial vehicles are well maintained. I had an old pickup truck that had a rear wheel oil seal fail resulting in the bearing melting and welding to the steel axle housing, plenty hot enough to start a grass fire. Ever see disc brake rotors glowing cherry red at night from prolonged braking on grades? In olden times you could downshift and use engine compression to slow a vehicle. With shifting now computer controlled on most cars you cannot manually downshift to use compression braking; result brakes get even hotter. True this only becomes a problem in hilly terrain during extreme fire danger, like where all the fires are burning.

Our family had an orchard/vineyard for nearly 50 years. Annual pruning started in November and had to be complete by Feb 1st. Pruning easily produced a ton per acre and that had to be removed (or burned) by the Feb 1st start of the blooming season. To maintain air quality burning was only allowed on cold wet days without wind, far different than the extreme fire danger conditions current in SoCal. You had to be good to start a fire in those conditions without using fire starters like gasoline and rubber tires. You have to cook the wet wood on a low fire until the wood starts to outgas. Eventually the wood outgases enough combustible fuel and literally will explode like a gasoline fire and the fire instantly is raging. The fire is so hot that wet green wood burns almost instantly when added to the fire. And then you realize what extreme fire danger is really like. Stupid, typical, human behavior during extreme fire conditions will start fires that in less extreme conditions would never spread.

Obviously you have never worked around high voltage power lines or you would not have used the dismissive term, "incidental low grade sparking ". Even the low grade sparking of a wall light switch is enough to ignite vegetation during extreme fire danger conditions (take off the cover plate in a darkened room and watch the sparks). High voltage lines when compromised can produce some spectacular arcing sparks. Even something as flimsy as a curtain rod shorting the poles of a transformer in a substation will blow the transformer and melting metal pieces with an intense arc (welding) event.
San Diego's biggest fires have been started by arcing power lines, lost hikers, dumb hunters, illegal camps, fireworks; actual arsonist caused fires have been smaller. This extreme fire danger event can make anyone a fire starter, no special skills required. In those cases where I know of a fire fighter starting the blaze, the fire danger was not elevated, they were helping mother nature burn...
You're right, I haven't worked around high voltage lines before. I mountain bike under them regularly and have yet to see something spark. But I'm ignorant of these causative phenomena. And I thank you for your thorough explanation for these more likely causes. A day where you don't learn something new is a of lost opportunity for the gray matter. This reassures me that arson as an explanation is unlikely. While the damage is no less destructive, to me bad luck seems more acceptable than arson.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.