In the case of the Santa Ana Winds, climate change has absolutely nothing to do with them. These winds are the direct result of geographic features only which allow these winds to happen, the same as they have for millennia. And will continue until California falls into the ocean because of the Big One.
Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try.
Prove that Santa Ana Wind intensity and occurrence has not changed over time, cite your sources. CA will not fall into the ocean either.
In the case of the Santa Ana Winds, climate change has absolutely nothing to do with them. These winds are the direct result of geographic features only which allow these winds to happen, the same as they have for millennia. And will continue until California falls into the ocean because of the Big One.
Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try.
And no matter how hard you try to deny it, there is an impact due to human caused climate change. These changes are making the base problem significantly worse.
U.S. wildfires are being fueled by southwestern North Americaâs driest 22-year period in at least 1,200 years, based on soil water content. Human-caused climate change was responsible for 42% of that soil dryness. 1
In the western United States human-caused climate change caused more than half the increase in forest fuel aridity (how dry and flammable vegetation is) since the 1970s and has approximately doubled the cumulative area burned in forest fires since 1984.2
Climate change-related declines in western spring snowpack, and increased evaporation from higher temperatures in spring, summer, and fall, have in the decades since the early 1980s reduced moisture and contributed to a marked increase in the frequency of large fires and the total area burned by western wildfires.3 A study of western U.S. ponderosa pine and Douglas fir forests concluded that climate change-related moisture deficits are undermining post-wildfire forest regeneration and recovery there
For sure if you keep ignoring the elephant in the room.
In the case of the Santa Ana Winds, climate change has absolutely nothing to do with them. These winds are the direct result of geographic features only which allow these winds to happen, the same as they have for millennia. And will continue until California falls into the ocean because of the Big One.
Climate change does not explain everything regardless of how much you try.
The undergrowth and dead material on the ground are the problems. Doesn't take much to get that started.
There are other challenges when it comes to urban areas. Sure, you can say that people should get rid of all the vegetation around their houses but the urban heat island is a real problem between fires. You could use plants that are less prone to burn but they tend to use more water and we don't have enough water. Maybe just cut down all the vegetation in the hills around LA? That's the only thing holding the mud and debris in place. Wait until the next big rains and watch the burned areas flow downhill.
yes, and that season is upon us....too.
Are there are full answers to living in areas prone to wildfires, flooding, tornadoes, earthquakes, cougar attacks...other than don't build there? (which aint happening)
Going to a different area...just wait till this $17M cut in the LAFD budget turns into billions of additional funding going forward.
Every time we have a disaster - 9/11, pandemic, homelessness, floods - the answer's always bigger budgets,, more bureaucracy.
I'm used to seeing wide "corridors" cut out of the trees for high tension/transmission lines - at least in NY and especially around NC. Granted, those are areas which have been heavily forested since forever, so maybe that's always been the policy. I've been told by several people I know from California and the PNW, that homeowners and landowners in some areas resist having those corridors cut out of the trees because they are unsightly; I don't know if that is actually true. It is my understanding that some of the severe fires which were determined to have been caused by power lines, were ones where arcs or lightning strikes sent burning materials or molten metal to the ground or underbrush, so the presence of a corridor may not have made as much of a difference.
The undergrowth and dead material on the ground are the problems. Doesn't take much to get that started.
There are other challenges when it comes to urban areas. Sure, you can say that people should get rid of all the vegetation around their houses but the urban heat island is a real problem between fires. You could use plants that are less prone to burn but they tend to use more water and we don't have enough water. Maybe just cut down all the vegetation in the hills around LA? That's the only thing holding the mud and debris in place. Wait until the next big rains and watch the burned areas flow downhill.
People who move *to* an area with power lines and then complain are in the same category as people who buy a house in the neighborhood of the airport and then complain about noise and traffic.
It's the "Well, if the Developers BUILT here, THEY Must know if it's safe to do so" mindset. Meanwhile people expanding more into woodlands are complaining about those irritating cougars on hiking trails.
I'm used to seeing wide "corridors" cut out of the trees for high tension/transmission lines - at least in NY and especially around NC. Granted, those are areas which have been heavily forested since forever, so maybe that's always been the policy. I've been told by several people I know from California and the PNW, that homeowners and landowners in some areas resist having those corridors cut out of the trees because they are unsightly; I don't know if that is actually true. It is my understanding that some of the severe fires which were determined to have been caused by power lines, were ones where arcs or lightning strikes sent burning materials or molten metal to the ground or underbrush, so the presence of a corridor may not have made as much of a difference.
Yeah it's easy for power companies to skimp on maintenance when the residents are so hostile... but now PG&E is on the hook for billions and you know the people demanding payment are the same ones who howled about the clearcuts. I think the compromise is to reorganize the grid so that most of the lines run in the same corridors as much as possible but a catastrophic fire would be even greater.
People who move *to* an area with power lines and then complain are in the same category as people who buy a house in the neighborhood of the airport and then complain about noise and traffic.
I've seen 10X cost for distribution lines. Transmission lines between substations typically run hundreds of Kilovolts, some run at 1000 KV (a million volts). Air is a great dielectric, and soil not so much. Even less when wet or your conduits are flooded. Air is about 80 times less conductive than pure water (no salts), and soil conductivity would vary by a number of factors, but would be at least that range. So simply managing the distance between conductors to prevent arcing would be a big challenge. And I think heat management would actually be a lot worse - there just isn't a good way to carry heat away from the middle of a conduit. We chased this problem in my old data center and we were dealing with pretty low voltages relatively. It wouldn't surprise me if the cost to bury transmission lines were 50-100X.
I'm used to seeing wide "corridors" cut out of the trees for high tension/transmission lines - at least in NY and especially around NC. Granted, those are areas which have been heavily forested since forever, so maybe that's always been the policy. I've been told by several people I know from California and the PNW, that homeowners and landowners in some areas resist having those corridors cut out of the trees because they are unsightly; I don't know if that is actually true. It is my understanding that some of the severe fires which were determined to have been caused by power lines, were ones where arcs or lightning strikes sent burning materials or molten metal to the ground or underbrush, so the presence of a corridor may not have made as much of a difference.
I believe there is some, especially in newer communities/areas....but it's really expensive.... like 10X+
I've seen 10X cost for distribution lines. Transmission lines between substations typically run hundreds of Kilovolts, some run at 1000 KV (a million volts). Air is a great dielectric, and soil not so much. Even less when wet or your conduits are flooded. Air is about 80 times less conductive than pure water (no salts), and soil conductivity would vary by a number of factors, but would be at least that range. So simply managing the distance between conductors to prevent arcing would be a big challenge. And I think heat management would actually be a lot worse - there just isn't a good way to carry heat away from the middle of a conduit. We chased this problem in my old data center and we were dealing with pretty low voltages relatively. It wouldn't surprise me if the cost to bury transmission lines were 50-100X.
Does anyone underground transmission? Heat would be a giant obstacle, but I'd imagine insulation would be a close second.
People have advocated it here but the power company pretty much said it wasn't close to practical. I had to prepare comments for a planned new transmission line and that wasn't really in my remit. Sometimes it is hard to tell when the consultation process is designed to be driven to their desired outcome or whether they are really evaluating possible solutions. In this case, they were probably right in terms of the burial but chose a crappy route and ignored the impacts on agriculture. Interferes with centre pivot irrigation and hard to do aerial spraying with a powerline across your potato field and other issues.
Out here in the flatlands, using modern directional-boring technology, burying distribution lines is a snap and affordable. Transmission lines are a completely different animal.
Does anyone underground transmission? Heat would be a giant obstacle, but I'd imagine insulation would be a close second.
Burying power lines is hugely expensive but if anyone can afford it, it is the US. It makes maintenance much harder, too. But with current technology, they can instantaneously tell precisely where a break occurs. One trouble currently is that they will shut down the power to keep from starting new fires in the winds and that exacerbates the other problems. Perhaps too little, too late, but large areas north of LA were without power after the fires started.
Every fire is going to be different and add to understanding of what can be done better. I have been involved in several post-mortem evaluations of events/accidents and they really only are useful if everyone approaches it from the point of view of looking for what can be done for improvement, rather than pointing fingers.
Out here in the flatlands, using modern directional-boring technology, burying distribution lines is a snap and affordable. Transmission lines are a completely different animal.
Well if the proper resources are available when the fire starts and is very small, perhaps it could be extinguished, regardless of how strong the winds are.
And it has come to light that the Eaton / Altadena fire was most likely started by power lines from good old SCE. That was the one that most concerned me when it first started. It had the greatest potential to cause a wide open burn that made a straight line to Long Beach through regular neighborhoods of the ordinary folk. It's still burning strong and the winds are kicking up again. Sure it is somewhat contained, but we don't know what side of the fire is contained and which is still out of control.
This event is still far from over.
Burying power lines is hugely expensive but if anyone can afford it, it is the US. It makes maintenance much harder, too. But with current technology, they can instantaneously tell precisely where a break occurs. One trouble currently is that they will shut down the power to keep from starting new fires in the winds and that exacerbates the other problems. Perhaps too little, too late, but large areas north of LA were without power after the fires started.
Every fire is going to be different and add to understanding of what can be done better. I have been involved in several post-mortem evaluations of events/accidents and they really only are useful if everyone approaches it from the point of view of looking for what can be done for improvement, rather than pointing fingers.