'@Rogers' cold and wet is irrelevant, once fire starts it dries up fuel in it's path. Russia's Far East lies in temperate climate zone, forest fires got much worse there thanks to increasingly dysfunctional forestry and firefighting efforts.
"If you choose to live close to a volcano or dry forest you risk getting burned."
If you live in temperate climate, you risk freezing to death in winter. If you live in tropical climate, you risk dying to poisonous insects and animals or parasites. If you live outside of the city you risk being killed by wild animals. If you live in a city, you risk being killed by people.
Risks can and should be managed.
"Forest roads up in the hot, dry Californian mountains would not stop the firestorms"
In case of Anthony Hopkins' house, it looks like a well-maintained lawn was fairly effective at stopping the fire. That was a joke. Maybe.
If local climate makes 10-meter wide gap in vegetation insufficient, it doesn't mean that this gap won't work. It means that you might need to make that gap 20-meter wide. If that's done, making a road of compacted dirt in the middle of that gap is a trivial additional expense where terrain allows it.
"Obviously the Californians have not considered roads built for just that purpose cost effective thus far."
Cost effectiveness doesn't seem to stand in the way of California's state legislation.
If you want to make an argument that bulldozing a fire-break lines through the forest and clearing vegetation near power lines and populated areas is more expensive than taking billions of dollars of property damage every year, I'd like to see some numbers on that.
Don't forget that California already has cap-and-trade legislation in place.
Right now it looks like California's governor is a moron who let his subordinates fail at their job of risk assessment and mitigation, vetoed the bill aimed at increasing safety regulation, but keeps collecting significant amount of carbon tax dollars without addressing actual issues like deficient water infrastructure or fire hazards, while blaming climate change for everything. Come think of it, it's something I expect from Californian Democrat.
317
'@Rogers' cold and wet is irrelevant, once fire starts it dries up fuel in it's path. Russia's Far East lies in temperate climate zone, forest fires got much worse there thanks to increasingly dysfunctional forestry and firefighting efforts.
"If you choose to live close to a volcano or dry forest you risk getting burned."
If you live in temperate climate, you risk freezing to death in winter. If you live in tropical climate, you risk dying to poisonous insects and animals or parasites. If you live outside of the city you risk being killed by wild animals. If you live in a city, you risk being killed by people.
Risks can and should be managed.
"Forest roads up in the hot, dry Californian mountains would not stop the firestorms"
In case of Anthony Hopkins' house, it looks like a well-maintained lawn was fairly effective at stopping the fire. That was a joke. Maybe.
If local climate makes 10-meter wide gap in vegetation insufficient, it doesn't mean that this gap won't work. It means that you might need to make that gap 20-meter wide. If that's done, making a road of compacted dirt in the middle of that gap is a trivial additional expense where terrain allows it.
"Obviously the Californians have not considered roads built for just that purpose cost effective thus far."
Cost effectiveness doesn't seem to stand in the way of California's state legislation.
If you want to make an argument that bulldozing a fire-break lines through the forest and clearing vegetation near power lines and populated areas is more expensive than taking billions of dollars of property damage every year, I'd like to see some numbers on that.
Don't forget that California already has cap-and-trade legislation in place.
Right now it looks like California's governor is a moron who let his subordinates fail at their job of risk assessment and mitigation, vetoed the bill aimed at increasing safety regulation, but keeps collecting significant amount of carbon tax dollars without addressing actual issues like deficient water infrastructure or fire hazards, while blaming climate change for everything. Come think of it, it's something I expect from Californian Democrat.