Malibu in flames again - Page 3

frogger · 11-26-2007, 06:07 AM

If only you could figure out how to redirect those flood waters to CA, Mule. It sure looks like they could use it.

Mule · 11-26-2007, 06:45 AM

svandamme · svandamme's Garage

aparently RHCP Flea's house got burnt to a crisp as well in those latest fires

frogger · 11-26-2007, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mule

I can't wait for the FEMA "press conference."

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mule

I wonder how many times CA burns up for every one flood in New Orleans?

probably about the same as the ratio of pit bull to other kind of dog attacks on humans.

Sorry, that one was tee'd up

craigster59 · craigster59's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by milt

All this where there's misfortune? It doesn't matter whose house, it's a travesty if it's mobile home or a 5 million job. Inside is where someone's life used to be. Now it's ashes. Family photos and the like cost the same for the rich and the poor. But there's no replacement value.

If any of you had lost a home to fire or other disaster, you would show nothing but sympathy for these people. To have it happen during the Holidays makes it even more tragic no matter what your income bracket may be.

berettafan · 11-26-2007, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nostatic

probably about the same as the ratio of pit bull to other kind of dog attacks on humans.

Sorry, that one was tee'd up

from the ladies tees maybe

c'mon nostatic, you are capable of far better than that!

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

hey, it's monday and I haven't had enough coffee yet.

I noticed you took some rather lame shots at BRPORSCHE in the other thread. Pot, meet kettle.

mkaraoglan · 11-26-2007, 10:13 AM

my heart goes out to all those who lost everything this past holiday.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/wildfire-above-malibu-forces-evacuations/20071124123209990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

also see slide 39....ouch

berettafan · 11-26-2007, 10:15 AM

OMG that 'tool' comment was just begging for a response!!! Wait a minute....didn't you have a retort loaded up as well?

besides, it was only 1 shot. i supported it with a follow up picture for the slow witted but that doesn't qualify as 'shots'; more like 'shot w/ support picture'

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

you betcha. But I didn't take you to task for your "shot w/support."

You thought it was begging for a response, I figured the shot at CA was as well. You sound like my mom. Or maybe I'm just projecting.

Can I borrow some money?

Mule · 11-26-2007, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nostatic

probably about the same as the ratio of pit bull to other kind of dog attacks on humans.

Sorry, that one was tee'd up

Glad you pointed that out. You guys want to eradicate pit bulls. A lot of Californians wanted to plow New Orleans under. If we apply our logic to California, we do what exactly?

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

I assume you mean "your" (meaning my) logic. Well, since I've never said that pit bulls should be eradicated or that New Orleans should be plowed under, I guess my logic would say that people take their fire insurance money and rebuild if they want.

One problem with generalizations, especially when you don't live here.

berettafan · 11-26-2007, 01:37 PM

no, no, no. Plows are not necessary to fix NO. Dump trucks and excavators will do the job nicely!

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

Even the ocean gave N.O. back.

artplumber · 11-26-2007, 02:12 PM

By the way found this (for cost estimates from that dependable investigative source USA today) re 2006 fire season:

DENVER — The federal government spent $1.5 billion fighting wildfires in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, a tab that reflects the most destructive fire year in nearly half a century.
The cost marks the fourth time in the past seven years that firefighting costs exceeded $1.3 billion, according to the National Interagency Fire Center in Boise. In 2002, federal agencies spent nearly $1.7 billion.

Since January, fires have burned more than 9.1 million acres. That is the worst destruction since the Boise center began keeping accurate records in 1960 and far exceeds the yearly average of 5.2 million acres over the past decade.

Despite the cost and scale of this year's firefighting efforts, "there is another statistic that we are pretty pleased about," said Mark Rey, an undersecretary of Agriculture who oversees the U.S. Forest Service.

Rey said 675 primary residences have been destroyed in fires so far this year, compared with 3,000 houses in 2003 and 2,000 in 2002, both considered bad fire years.

Rey attributes the relatively low number of houses lost to ambitious federal efforts to remove brush and other debris that fuels fire from around communities that border forests, as well as better planning by local fire departments to protect residential areas.

The previous record for acres burned was almost 8.7 million acres in 2005, when the government spent more than $875 million. Firefighting costs vary widely depending on whether communities are threatened and whether fires in remote areas are allowed to burn out.

States that have lost the largest acreage to fires this year include Texas (1.5 million acres), Idaho (845,000 acres), Montana (830,000 acres), New Mexico (610,000 acres), Oregon (497,000 acres) and California (402,000 acres).

Five large fires were actively burning Wednesday: two in California and one each in Montana, Oregon and Washington. Those fires cover about 635,000 acres

sammyg2 · 11-26-2007, 02:43 PM

Interesting. Based soly on that information, The fires in California added up to about 8.5% of total acres burned and that only listed the top 6 states.
If you factored in fires from all states and not just the top 6, I'm sure that percentage would fall much lower. Possibly as low as 5%.

The interesting part is that California has 12% of the population of the US.
So if you figure it out per capita, California has less area burned per citizen than many other states and therefore less cost per capita to fight those fires.

artplumber · 11-26-2007, 05:03 PM

C'mon Sammy, you know better than to look at a single year. The fires were bad in TX last year because of the drought. Nowhere near the same numbers this year (or previously). And from an average sampling of stories about big forest fires, they are pretty much restricted to the West (ie Rockies states and West, excluding NV)

Chuck Moreland · 11-26-2007, 05:48 PM

How much CO2 was released by these fires, vs human caused CO2 emissions from the malibu area?

dd74 · 11-26-2007, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck Moreland

How much CO2 was released by these fires, vs human caused CO2 emissions from the malibu area?

Considering the fires can be more easily seen from outer space than Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, among others, toasting marshmallows on their deck, I'd have to nod to the fires as having released more CO2 - at least within the last two or three days.