3 ms·

Outdoor fires (which include wildfires) result in ~50 deaths annually in the U.S.[0] You want to ban trees for that? I'm curious about your thoughts on how we s

by smhost 9y ago

Outdoor fires (which include wildfires) result in ~50 deaths annually in the U.S.[0] You want to ban trees for that? I'm curious about your thoughts on how we should deal with the actual problems we have. For example, cooking-related residential fires, which kill ~150 people annually in the U.S.[1] Clearly it's not worth the risk to cook our food. ---- [0] https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v9i2.pdf https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v9i2.pdf [1] https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/res_bldg_fire_estimates.pdf https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/res_bldg_...

FrozenVoid 9y ago
The economic damage from ruined buildings, evacuations, burned property/vehicles/etc is another factor. Its like living in a cheap wooden house in tornado valley. I'm not for "banning trees", there should be just a safety zone which separate vulnerable urban/suburban housing and forest zones. That way fire will not become an emergency in principle. I'm just advocating for a system where firebreaks are several km wide and prevent winds from spreading fire material(which short firebreaks fails to do). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebreak (this is the general concept ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensible_space_(fire_control) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensible_space_(fire_control...