 
     |
| Global wildfires. (Page 4/8) |
|
rinselberg
|
AUG 21, 10:17 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by MidEngineManiac:
Difference is, Rinse is you think the heat is causing the fires.
I think the sheer volume of fires is causing the heat. |
|
I feel very confident in saying that this "fire-driven" theory about the current and recent high temperatures around the globe is "nimpossible."
I couldn't turn up any remarks from scientists about the heat energy of these fires, except in a very localized context. In other words, unless you are close enough to one of these fires to be endangered by it, you aren't feeling any heat that could be attributed to even the sum total of all the current and recently active wildfires everywhere on the planet. If any scientists thought this was a significant factor, I think I would have seen it in my Google search.
That's exactly what I expected, a priori.
On the other hand:
| quote | | During World War II, the U.S. dropped an atomic bomb over Hiroshima, Japan, wiping out 90% of the city. [For the entirety of the year 2022], researchers say, the ocean heated up an amount equal to the energy of five of those bombs detonating underwater "every second for 24 hours a day for the entire year." . . . |
|
That was published on January 13 of this year, so six months before the "hottest July on record, worldwide" became a common media headline.
| quote | | Ocean heat shatters record with warming equal to 5 atomic bombs exploding "every second" for a year. Researchers say it's "getting worse." |
|
Li Cohn for CBS News; January 13, 2023.
https://www.cbsnews.com/new...g-worse-researchers/
It's all about the Greenhouse Effect and how that increases the warming of the planet from the energy of sunlight. Humans are amping up the Greenhouse Effect and you are already familiar with how that is explained. The heat energy from the wildfires is not on any scientist's "radar" in terms of climate or weather.
What is?
The smoke. The carbon dioxide and other gases from the trees, shrubs, brush and grasses that burn. The longer term changes of the burned areas in terms of the carbon cycle.
But not the heat energy.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-22-2023).]
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
AUG 22, 07:14 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
|
|
I have an annual subscription to This Old House Streaming... and the first like... 6 years of This Old House are all sponsored by them!
|
|
|
cliffw
|
AUG 22, 07:46 AM
|
|
fredtoast is right. his source is national public radio. A government indoctrination news source, controlled by the officials in power
| quote | Originally posted by fredtoast:
"Controlled burns are seen by forest ecologists as perhaps the most essential tool for reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfire and helping to undo a century of fire suppression policy that has worsened wildfire conditions that now annually wreak havoc across large swaths of the West.
Experts in the field say the pace and scale at which the USFS is implementing intentional fire is dangerously insufficient.
Hurteau notes that just about all of the peer reviewed research on the issue as well as the Forest Service's own plans for reducing hazardous forest fuels call for a historic scaling-up of prescribed burns."
|
|
Ok big guy, it's been a year since that report. What progress was made ?
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
AUG 22, 07:56 AM
|
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
AUG 22, 08:17 AM
|
|
Hey Rinse... so, I don't doubt that this is a good strategy (I skimmed it). The big problem though is that this only applies to Federal lands. In California, for example... 47% of that land is owned by the Federal Government. However, the Federal government was also managing the state lands for a LONG time... over a decade. I want to say this stopped under Trump, but I seem to recall it might have even happened under Obama as part of a budget negotiation. It didn't happen over night, and they were given plenty of warning. When California was left responsible for managing their own lands, they kind of fumbled it... and there were a whole host of regulatory issues... both from environmental activists to union strikes, to a lack of equipment (money was diverted to other things).
This kind of lays out the issues as they were in 2020:
Analysis: California’s government solely responsible for states forest management and wildfire debacle
https://www.climatedepot.co...nd-wildfire-debacle/
Bottom line though, if the state is willing to do their part AND adopt the Federal recommendations for fire management... then they can help prevent these fires. It seems to me though, a great many of them START as a result of mental illness (radical activists that cause the thing they're trying to bring attention to), and crumbling infrastructure (downed power lines due to failures).
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
AUG 22, 10:02 AM
|
|
Prescribed burns and selective harvesting are the way to do it. Obama and Newsome screwed up. Trump set them straight.
This is a picture of the aftermath of Arizona's second largest forest fire, the Rodeo-Chediski. Over 700 square miles, caused by arson.
Managed land on the left - A fool's paradise on the right[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 08-22-2023).]
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
AUG 22, 10:20 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
Prescribed burns and selective harvesting are the way to do it. Obama and Newsome screwed up. Trump set them straight.
This is a picture of the aftermath of Arizona's second largest forest fire, the Rodeo-Chediski. Over 700 square miles, caused by arson.
Managed land on the left - A fool's paradise on the right
|
|
Not to mention, this provides a traversal path (a road) with which to properly fight the fire along the fire break.
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
AUG 22, 11:04 AM
|
|
A crown fire is when the crown, the tops of the trees burn.
A dense forest will support a crown fire which will burn everything. The trees literally explode from the boiling sap. No living thing can survive.
A managed forest will burn the undergrowth, some trees will be scorched but most will survive.
I have posted this video here before. It is only 43 seconds long.
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
AUG 22, 11:24 AM
|
|
The advantages of a prescribed burn go beyond merely eliminating the fuel. The ashes will return nutrients to the soil.
There are also economic benefits from selective harvesting.
Forest management is truly a win/win situation.
|
|
|
|
fredtoast
|
AUG 22, 12:52 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
Forest management is truly a win/win situation. |
|
I guess that is why I can't find a single person who opposes forest management.
|
|
|
|