3 ms·

The biggest effect will be that they won’t have to trigger blackouts during high winds to prevent downed lines from starting forest fires. For those in the affe

The biggest effect will be that they won’t have to trigger blackouts during high winds to prevent downed lines from starting forest fires. For those in the affected area, that’s a big deal. But if CA wants to reduce these fires, they desperately need to catch back up on their controlled burns. A combination of low brush fire for decades (not forest fire!) and changing environment has built up an extremely dangerous backlog of fuel that makes CA specifically and the PNW in general a massive fire risk. Short of fixing global warming and moving everyone away from the interface between nature and city, the only solution is to burn up all that fuel in a controlled way.

bluGill 5y ago
This doesn't apply to CA, but in general it is a good idea for most of the world. The vegetation there has been on natural cycles for years of burning hot every few years. Sure power lines start the file, but they will start anyway: large hot fires have always been part of the life cycle of that area. This is very different from the low brush fires that are a natural part of most other forests.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  CA has huge fires partly because they suppressed the low brush fires that were more common a century or two ago. Because they’re now decades behind on the natural burns that would normally happen every summer, the state will have to work overtime to catch back up to a safe equilibrium. To be fair, climate change and changing habitation patterns are also making this much worse. https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/11/californias-wildfire-controlled-prescribed-burns-native-americans/ https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/11/californias-...
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  Fire intensity in California is absolutely related to frequency. Historically, most California forests had low intensity burns every few years. Now, these same forests haven't had a fire in 100+ years, resulting in extremely intense fires that leave behind ashen moonscapes. This is not the historic normal fire cycle in CA.

bluGill 5y ago

This doesn't apply to CA, but in general it is a good idea for most of the world. The vegetation there has been on natural cycles for years of burning hot every few years. Sure power lines start the file, but they will start anyway: large hot fires have always been part of the life cycle of that area. This is very different from the low brush fires that are a natural part of most other forests.

ashtonkem 5y ago
CA has huge fires partly because they suppressed the low brush fires that were more common a century or two ago. Because they’re now decades behind on the natural burns that would normally happen every summer, the state will have to work overtime to catch back up to a safe equilibrium. To be fair, climate change and changing habitation patterns are also making this much worse. https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/11/californias-wildfire-controlled-prescribed-burns-native-americans/ https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/11/californias-...
s1artibartfast 5y ago
Fire intensity in California is absolutely related to frequency. Historically, most California forests had low intensity burns every few years. Now, these same forests haven't had a fire in 100+ years, resulting in extremely intense fires that leave behind ashen moonscapes. This is not the historic normal fire cycle in CA.