4 ms·
Is there a way to build permanent housing in parts of California that are prone to fires even with controlled burns? Even controlled fires pose a risk to habita
by DiscourseFan 3y ago
Is there a way to build permanent housing in parts of California that are prone to fires even with controlled burns? Even controlled fires pose a risk to habitation; if you were a semi-nomadic tribe (like the former residents before Americans brought western "Reason" and domestication to the west coast), you could move everyone out of the area to be burned, and then come back X many months/years later when wildlife and vegetation returned.
If, on the other hand, the area to be burned has "invested capital" and houses and land on it--essentially, private property, which has this strange quality of fixity even in the face of something as destructive as the earth (which never fails to dissolve it), how would you guarantee, without incredibly high insurance premiums, that people's houses wouldn't burn down.
And even if people are willing to pay the premiums, they would do so knowing that the government might decide, almost randomly (to them), to burn a chunk of forest right next to their house. They'd get fair warning, sure, but who wants to own a house that might burn down in 10 years because the state decides that its too much of a risk to have that patch of land burn naturally?
- Arrath 3y ago> Is there a way to build permanent housing in parts of California that are prone to fires even with controlled burns? Absolutely. A good starting point is to look to Australia's regulations for construction materials, methods, water storage and setback/firebreak requirements, etc. for fire safety in bushfire prone areas. While it may be picturesque to have your house or cabin nestled in amongst the forest, your fire survivability is Zero.
- taneq 3y agoEven so, we lose plenty of houses because people want to live ‘out in the bush’ but don’t want to do all of these things.
- EdwardDiego 3y agoThe fact that people can go build a house in the middle of bush that's renowned, sometimes even evolved for, for fire, strikes me as nuts. Especially when volunteer firefighters then have to risk their lives to save people with the lovely view. (Ditto California...)
- mtnGoat 3y agoI don’t know anyone working on wildfires in the United States for free. Not saying there is no risk, but they are paid and understand the risks. Some nice neighbors have their own contract fire crews, which are not cheap.
- Quarrel 3y agoIn Australia, "most" rural firefighters are volunteers, but have equipment and training providing by their local Government run rural fireservice (that has fulltime paid administrators). The population density between Australia and the US is radically different though which changes the dynamic (deserts and marginal land exist in both, but Australia is particularly water challenged with no high mountains, so no major rivers).
- blackguardx 3y agoI know folks that are volunteer wildfire firefighters in Colorado and in California they were enlisting prisoners and paying them very low wages.
- EdwardDiego 3y agoFun fact, NZ and Australian volunteer rural fire-fighters often fly in to help out with bad fire seasons in California. It's good practice.
- mistrial9 3y agothis happened with some East Coast settlers moving to California after 1870 or so.. many areas known for fire now were the sites of fine home building with expensive techniques and materials, plus the lower quality homes or whatever. English speaking people apparently did not get the memo?
- toast0 3y agoI live in a wooded area in Washington state, and I'm not too worried about my buildings, because I have a relatively huge clearing around my house and garage. And I don't live in my outbuilding that's kind of too close to the forest. But I'd still need to evacuate, somehow, if there were a forest fire. The smoke would be dangerous, I imagine utility power would be lost, and my generator is actually a couple trees into the woods. Insurance companies could presumably do inspections of clearings and cancel or charge more if you don't have sufficient clearing, but municipalities aren't going to like the tree cutting that results.
- dredmorbius 3y agoWhat's hard to appreciate about wildfire is just how horrific conditions can be. Yes, defensible space helps, but temperatures can exceed 1,000 to 2,000 F / 500 -- 1,000 C. Sustained exposure to that can damage all kinds of materials, let alone be difficult to survive. Even at considerable distance the radiant heat of even a smaller wildfire is quite palpable, something I've had personal experience of. The fire will also reduce or remove available oxygen, there can be tornadic-ferocity winds (and what the winds blow), embers, and all manner of other threats. Smoke is only one of your worries.
- devilbunny 3y agoBuild it out of concrete blocks with a metal roof. The contents are almost certainly flammable, but the structure isn’t.
- PeterisP 3y agoDoes it really make a difference if after the fire the burnt-out structure is still standing with the dead owners in it?
- lazide 3y agoMetal shutters, and the owners would be fine. Sprinklers on the roof work pretty well too.
- idiotsecant 3y agoI'm not sure the conditions in the middle of a wildfire are conducive to continued breathing.
- lazide 3y agoAssuming the windows are closed and any outside ventilation is turned off, there would be zero issues inside the house for the length of time required. That said, sitting around in an active wildfire is a bad idea compared to not being there. The biggest issue is usually fuel close to the structure (bushes or trees right next to the house), or openings in the structure like eaves. Rooftop sprinklers work decently well for wooden roofs, but it's more complicated than just installing them due to potential water pressure issues. Metal roofs shouldn't need them. All it takes is a small hole in the armor though sometimes, and without someone there to watch it and fight it, it takes a big change in building styles to be 100% sure. Like cement structure + metal framing & roofing + minimal combustible furniture, etc. The biggest issue IMO is that western style (really central european/north western european) construction tends to focus on greenery, windows, wood and natural materials, etc. Spanish-Colonial style construction is better suited to these kinds of conditions, with some modifications (avoiding exposed beams, and dealing with earthquakes both major necessary changes). [https://firesafemarin.org/articles/should-i-put-a-sprinkler-on-my-roof-or-stand-there-with-a-garden-hose/#gsc.tab=0 https://firesafemarin.org/articles/should-i-put-a-sprinkler-...]