California Fires

[uhhello]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Very disturbing report about events leading up to the fire and the actions of leadership, I am shocked they still have their jobs.  If the reports are correct (and leadership is responding trying to defend their actions so it appears to be true), the experts warned them and urged them to activate standby and reserve capabilities.  The main fire department had a total of 40 trucks available if they kept a shift over and activated their contingency plan.  The plan also called for them to pre-position trucks in the pacific-palasades neighborhoods, the fire chief declined to call up the additional resources and they had just FIVE trucks to deal with the initial outbreak.  Some of those neighborhoods did not get engine support for 48 hours.

No way of telling how that would have impacted the outcome, but talk about an epic leadership failure.

"Two days to stop the spread"

[Biff_T]

 

 

[Springer]

 

[Stoker]

If you're fighting fires with water and trucks, your policy and planning is already a disaster. We didn't dramatically lower the loss from household fires by putting a fire truck on every block, we did it by building code changes, insurance pressure, and consumer product safety to reduce flammability of household materials. You won't stop California fires by dumping an extra billion into firefighting, but you might do it by mandating (by code and insurance) metal roofs/siding, making it take less than a decade to get approval for controlled burns, and a dozen other long term policy changes that have been suggested and mostly ignored by Californians for decades.

Luckily, if you don't do anything to mitigate your home's fire risk in California, the state will still insure you and pay for it via a tax on everyone whose risk is low enough to get private insurance. That surely won't lead to problems down the road.

[Majestik Møøse]

3 hours ago, Stoker said:

Luckily, if you don't do anything to mitigate your home's fire risk in California, the state will still insure you and pay for it via a tax on everyone whose risk is low enough to get private insurance. That surely won't lead to problems down the road.

Go look at Google Maps or Zillow in any California mountain town. Almost all shingle roofs with little to no fire rating. Plywood siding is standard. A new standing seam metal roof would run $60-90k (cheaper than a new house) but is a big expense for the average Joe. 

A solar roof like the one Tesla makes is extremely fire resistant (Class A) so if the California government can get over their biases there could be some very interesting tax credits for killing two birds with one stone.

[ViperMan]

53 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:

Go look at Google Maps or Zillow in any California mountain town. Almost all shingle roofs with little to no fire rating. Plywood siding is standard. A new standing seam metal roof would run $60-90k (cheaper than a new house) but is a big expense for the average Joe. 

A solar roof like the one Tesla makes is extremely fire resistant (Class A) so if the California government can get over their biases there could be some very interesting tax credits for killing two birds with one stone.

They'll probably do something along these lines, but it won't be available if you're over any reasonable income limit. See the following: https://www.ebikeincentives.org/eligibility/

They did the same thing with electric bikes, but they made sure that anyone who actually contributes to the tax kiddy isn't eligible. LOL. Someone who barely makes $45K per year ain't spending $2,000 on a bicycle, and hence probably doesn't benefit from the credit. It'll be the standard democratic "this feels and looks good" vs "it is good." True climate emergencies would necessitate removing all barriers to addressing "existential issues" - yet another reason (#69) why I don't take their "climate change" rhetoric seriously.

[ecugringo]

I lived next to superior CO in 2021 when the Marshall fires raged through that area.   It’s near boulder.

we had sustained winds over 60 with gusts over 100 mph.  The front range was drier than Death Valley that year.

this fire was only a day but torched over 1k homes.  Not saying there shouldn’t be criticism but fires like this you really can’t stop.  It’s really hard to explain just how fast they move.  Imo they could have had 10x the fire trucks but it wouldn’t have done much good.  Everything still would have burned.

[ViperMan]

20 minutes ago, ecugringo said:

I lived next to superior CO in 2021 when the Marshall fires raged through that area.   It’s near boulder.

we had sustained winds over 60 with gusts over 100 mph.  The front range was drier than Death Valley that year.

this fire was only a day but torched over 1k homes.  Not saying there shouldn’t be criticism but fires like this you really can’t stop.  It’s really hard to explain just how fast they move.  Imo they could have had 10x the fire trucks but it wouldn’t have done much good.  Everything still would have burned.

The problem is that if it is the case that there are unstoppable fires, then we need not build in those areas. Ask me how much sympathy I have for New Orleans - you don't rebuild a city next to the ocean that is below sea level - or if you do, you accept the inevitable consequence of being underwater. Else, if the fire is stoppable, through preparation, forest management, etc, we should have been preparing for them. Said another way, the conditions that enabled this fire to happen should never have been allowed to manifest. It hearkens back to the Smoky the Bear commercials from when I was a kid: "only you, can prevent forest fires."

It's almost like prevention has been on the menu for some time...hmmmm.

[Springer]

On 1/19/2025 at 4:21 PM, ViperMan said:

 Else, if the fire is stoppable, through preparation, forest management, etc, we should have been preparing for them. Said another way, the conditions that enabled this fire to happen should never have been allowed to manifest. It hearkens back to the Smoky the Bear commercials from when I was a kid: "only you, can prevent forest fires."

 

The previous video interview with Sen. Tim Sheehy is very interesting and worth watching.  I didn't know much about him but at 39 he is impressive.  Even though he was SEAL after graduating from the Naval Academy he had most of his pilot ratings prior to attending.  After leaving the Navy he formed an aerial firefighting company out of Montana and was qualified in most their aircraft.  He has a lot to say about what happened in L.A. and forest management.

Edited 22 hours ago by Springer

[ecugringo]

16 minutes ago, ViperMan said:

The problem is that if it is the case that there are unstoppable fires, then we need not build in those areas. Ask me how much sympathy I have for New Orleans - you don't rebuild a city next to the ocean that is below sea level - or if you do, you accept the inevitable consequence of being underwater. Else, if the fire is stoppable, through preparation, forest management, etc, we should have been preparing for them. Said another way, the conditions that enabled this fire to happen should never have been allowed to manifest. It hearkens back to the Smoky the Bear commercials from when I was a kid: "only you, can prevent forest fires."

It's almost like prevention has been on the menu for some time...hmmmm.

The US has completely mismanaged the forest.  That is very obvious.

 

the Marshall fires in co were from dry grasslands.  But there was a 3 yr period where everything in co was on fire.  After the Marshall fires my wife wanted to leave the state.  It was the final nail after all the bs in that state.  Many suspect It was eco terrorism to push the global warming agenda

but you’re right…..we are allowing ppl to live in high danger areas then expecting insurance to cover it.

i agree with an above post that insurance will dictate building codes to help mitigate loss.  I just read about the architecture of a home that survived in palisades.  The material and design all made the home survive.   But what do u do when nobody wants to live in states like Ohio.

[ViperMan]

5 minutes ago, Springer said:

The previous video interview with Sen. Tim Sheehy is very interesting and worth watching.  I didn't know much about him but at 39 he is impressive.  Even though he was SEAL after graduating from the Naval Academy he had most of his pilot ratings prior to attending.  After leaving the Navy he formed an aerial firefighting company out of Montana and was qualified most their aircraft.  He has a lot to say about what happened in L.A. and forest management.

I watched it and I agree. I'll keep my eye on him going forward. Seems like one of those guys that has a true grasp of what the hell he's talking about. Which is surprisingly rare (and refreshing) these days.

4 minutes ago, ecugringo said:

The US has completely mismanaged the forest.  That is very obvious.

 

the Marshall fires in co were from dry grasslands.  But there was a 3 yr period where everything in co was on fire.  After the Marshall fires my wife wanted to leave the state.  It was the final nail after all the bs in that state.  Many suspect It was eco terrorism to push the global warming agenda

but you’re right…..we are allowing ppl to live in high danger areas then expecting insurance to cover it.

i agree with an above post that insurance will dictate building codes to help mitigate loss.  I just read about the architecture of a home that survived in palisades.  The material and design all made the home survive.   But what do u do when nobody wants to live in states like Ohio.

Talking to a family member, it's apparently the case that many of these home catch on fire from the inside. An ember will float into an air vent or the like and then ignite flammable material on the inside of the home and so on. I certainly agree that building codes and insurance have a big role to play going forward.

As an aside, I can't help but also point at prop 13 as a contributing factor. This is perhaps one of the consequences of serially under-funding your state based on a property tax law that all but guarantees your local governments will be unable to fund basic services. The way I see it, this fire was a decades-long policy decision in the making.

[Smokin]

It would be interesting to see a study in how houses were saved verses the ones that weren't.  I don't buy the catching fire inside from floating embers theory; very few HVACs have external ducts that could transport an ember to a flammable area inside.  Attics generally have vents, but the soffit grates are small enough to keep out most pests, which would preclude an ember big enough from getting through to catch a 2x4 on fire.

My guess is the fire is hot enough against the side of the house that the inside of the exterior wall heats up enough to catch fire.  Kinda like how papers catch fire inside a gun safe with zero direct flame contact.  Or the fire is hot enough that it breaks the windows and gets inside that way.

Hopefully the insurance companies figure it out and make policy incentives to help since I have zero confidence the government there will get their act together.  I'm betting that a 1000 gal cistern with a gas powered pump would have saved many of these houses and would have cost $2K to install (or $5K since its California).  Multiple stories of houses being saved because the owner turned on a bunch of $5 sprinklers around the house before leaving.

[disgruntledemployee]

On 1/18/2025 at 12:10 PM, Biff_T said:

Bill Maher, at about the 5:30 mark, talking about diversity...

That part reminds me of this scene from the show, Rescue Me.  Not an exact correlation, but I think the point can be made that you want the best qualified in a job like FD Chief, and firefighters in general.  Along the last lines of the video, I agree, I don't care what the firefighter looks like, color, ethnicity, etc., but they better be capable of carrying/dragging my fat ass to safety.  Great show btw.

 

[mp5g]

33 minutes ago, Smokin said:

It would be interesting to see a study in how houses were saved verses the ones that weren't.  I don't buy the catching fire inside from floating embers theory; very few HVACs have external ducts that could transport an ember to a flammable area inside.  Attics generally have vents, but the soffit grates are small enough to keep out most pests, which would preclude an ember big enough from getting through to catch a 2x4 on fire.

My guess is the fire is hot enough against the side of the house that the inside of the exterior wall heats up enough to catch fire.  Kinda like how papers catch fire inside a gun safe with zero direct flame contact.  Or the fire is hot enough that it breaks the windows and gets inside that way.

Hopefully the insurance companies figure it out and make policy incentives to help since I have zero confidence the government there will get their act together.  I'm betting that a 1000 gal cistern with a gas powered pump would have saved many of these houses and would have cost $2K to install (or $5K since its California).  Multiple stories of houses being saved because the owner turned on a bunch of $5 sprinklers around the house before leaving.

https://www.ctpost.com/realestate/article/passive-house-survives-fire-in-california-how-20034706.php

Nice article that talks about why Passive house design helps with wildfires. It’s not only the house but some of the managing characteristics of the lawn that also help. 

“To reduce or even eliminate the need for heat in the winter and air conditioning in the summer, a passive house is built airtight, using strong exterior insulation, triple-pane windows, and construction methods that ensure no heat is transferred across the exterior of the building. No outdoor air seeps in, and no indoor air escapes.

This airtight construction is one of the reasons the house could withstand a blaze.

As Bloomberg reported, the house does not have eaves, overhangs, or attic vents “to allow sparks to get inside the roof, which is metal, with a fire-resistant underlayment.”

Airtight construction helps stop embers from being sucked into building envelopes,” says Semke. “Simpler forms (fewer zigs and zags, bump-outs, etc.) mean fewer nooks and crannies for embers to take hold, plus less overall surface area exposed to fire risk.”

[HerkPerfMan]

My sister-in-law and family lost their home in the first day of the Palisades fire along with the majority of their neighborhood. The pictures were wild: house reduced to rubble and car melted into a heap but trees and bushes still had green leaves. It sent me down a rabbit hole about wildfire behavior and prevention. This article sums up most everything about "defensible space" and what catches fire from embers - especially the test video. Now imagine that with 50+ mph winds

https://theconversation.com/how-to-protect-your-home-from-wildfires-advice-from-fire-prevention-experts-on-creating-defensible-space-233847

 

Edited Monday at 11:23 PM by HerkPerfMan

[uhhello]

18 minutes ago, HerkPerfMan said:

My sister-in-law and family lost their home in the first day of the Palisades fire along with the majority of their neighborhood. The pictures were wild: house reduced to rubble and car melted into a heap but trees and bushes still had green leaves. It sent me down a rabbit hole about wildfire behavior and prevention. This article sums up most everything about "defensible space" and what catches fire from embers - especially the test video. Now imagine that with 50+ mph winds

https://theconversation.com/how-to-protect-your-home-from-wildfires-advice-from-fire-prevention-experts-on-creating-defensible-space-233847

 

Shits crazy

[Smokin]

Yeah, that's nuts.  The fiber cement siding results are impressive considering it's usually 1/2" or less thick.  Would have been nice to see how long that window would have lasted if it were closed.  My house is largely made of concrete, so I feel pretty safe from any outside wildfire.  But I have had a window crack due to a grill being too close to it when cooking some brats that flared up.  I'd imagine that in a wildfire, the heat could fully break the glass.  Also would have been nice to see how long the attic held out with the embers there as that's the other significant vulnerability, even with a passive or concrete sided/walled house.  I'm sure some passive houses have sealed attics and more might after this, but you throw 18" of loose insulation in the attic and your heat transfer there is negligible so I don't think most have sealed attic spaces.

If you're thinking of building, I would absolutely look into the passive home.  Sounds like it's only for hippies, but I think the long term payoffs are well worth it and the fire stuff is just one more reason.

[uhhello]

9 minutes ago, Smokin said:

Yeah, that's nuts.  The fiber cement siding results are impressive considering it's usually 1/2" or less thick.  Would have been nice to see how long that window would have lasted if it were closed.  My house is largely made of concrete, so I feel pretty safe from any outside wildfire.  But I have had a window crack due to a grill being too close to it when cooking some brats that flared up.  I'd imagine that in a wildfire, the heat could fully break the glass.  Also would have been nice to see how long the attic held out with the embers there as that's the other significant vulnerability, even with a passive or concrete sided/walled house.  I'm sure some passive houses have sealed attics and more might after this, but you throw 18" of loose insulation in the attic and your heat transfer there is negligible so I don't think most have sealed attic spaces.

If you're thinking of building, I would absolutely look into the passive home.  Sounds like it's only for hippies, but I think the long term payoffs are well worth it and the fire stuff is just one more reason.

The 50+ mph winds they had to will have other shit flying around doing damage as well.  

[Smokin]

4 minutes ago, uhhello said:

The 50+ mph winds they had to will have other shit flying around doing damage as well.  

True.  When I was looking at retiring in the midwest with threats of tornadoes, I was going to try to get European style roller shutters.  Had them on my house in Europe and they were awesome.  Those would stop most things short of a bullet (and were awesome for sleeping in on night flight mornings, bedroom was pitch black).  I'm sure that as big of a deal as this fire is, it won't be big enough of a deal to get most people to think outside the box and most those houses will get rebuilt on the same 1940s mas production technology that 90% of American homes are built on.

[Milton]

On 1/13/2025 at 11:50 AM, Majestik Møøse said:

Corruption is everywhere in America (especially the legal kind with campaign contributions) so that’s not unique. Probably the same amount as the South and Northeast but California is just better at hiding it because they’re not overt Good Ole Boys.

But to the people drawn to politics, money isn’t as influential as power. Ideas and policy are a bureaucrat’s personal power, and challenging the ideas that define their lives and legacy is what makes them dig in like nothing else.

In California, the political class is centered on returning the state to what they remember it looking like when they were teenagers. It’s a false vision of a “natural” California that hasn’t existed in 200 years. People have forever changed California from a natural equilibrium into an economic powerhouse and you can never go back.

The Central Valley levies changed grasslands, floodplain marshes, and oak forests into tree nut farms and rice paddies; its 10% of American farm output (cool), but the farmers’ unrestricted wells have drained the aquifers so much that the southern valley has sank dozens of feet.

The mountain forests were able to grow 200 year old trees because they could self-regulate; lightning strike fires would burn the little stuff and the big trees would survive. But now because even the remote forests have a house every few miles the fires need to be put out immediately. And the compounding problem is those houses are served by 1960s power lines and roads that cause the fires in the first place. Roads and utilities that can’t be improved without permits from a dozen entities because brine shrimp, mice, and smelts might be affected.

So there’s no going back to equilibrium naturally, it’ll have to be constantly managed and adapted, which the bureaucracy has not been willing to do. The LA fires pale in comparison to one of the million acre fires that are unfortunately common in the Sierras, but hopefully the day and night visibility for 10M people in LA will cause some movement.

The solution is a combination of reservoir building, utility line improvements (including self-contained systems like solar and power walls, why not), brush management in critical areas (you can’t do it everywhere, too big), steel roofs/siding (the majority of legacy mountain buildings are asphalt shingles, really), and more money for air attack planes and pilots. Some smelts and mice might not make it, but at least less will die in fires.

I think this is an important point in politics but one that is often missed, where we assume simple corruption is the root of all ills. Corruption is bad, but it is a known quantity. Its public officials using their position for personal gain, e.g. kickbacks via campaign funds, getting a friend/family member a well-paying govt job, no-bid contracts, etc. These things are and have been the norm throughout the world; the U.S. is unique in that we at least try to hold people accountable and route out corruption either through legal action or elections. 

But corruption is not the same as destructive or malevolent ideology. Socialist apologists often claim the USSR and other centrally-planned states failed due to "corruption" i.e. their leaders and burueaucrats were self-serving. That may be true, but its not the reason why they all fail. They are by their very nature doomed to fail because their ideology is unworkable. These systems didn't lead to mass starvation, economic decline, loss of civil rights, etc simply because their leaders were living in largesse. They were bound to produce poverty even if they had the most honest and comitted political leaders.

A bit of an extreme example, but the same destructive characteristics apply to some of our radical politics today. Paying useless DEI bureaucrats hefty 6 figure salaries is a waste of money (we might consider the financial loss simple "corruption"). Far worse is the corrosive effect they have on their organization's integrity, operational effectiveness, and public trust. The LA Water Dept Commissioner (750k/yr) and Fire Chiefs (400k/yr) who were until 2 weeks ago flaunting their DEI credentials are certainly overpaid busybodies. The few million wasted on gov salaries is bad (corruption) but the far-reaching and catastrophic effects they have on their instiutions and public trust is on an entirely different scale.

Ditto for the "well-intended" programs in CA like the bullet train, which after 15 years has cost $10B and has nothing to show. Or the myriad environmental regulations designed to protect obscure flora/fauna yet make wildland and watershed management impossible. We shouldn't view unworkable policies and malevolent ideologies the same way we do simple corruption. Corruption can be penalized, voted out or otherwise managed; utopian bullshit will produce catastrophic results every time regardless of who leads them.