Public service announcement about the De-energizing of Rural California.

[shunyadragon]

I don't think that anyone is suggesting that politics caused the fire but rather that it exacerbated the situation.

I believe based on some of the posts they most definitely are. Using the shotgun approach of referring to one off events like the 2010 drought in West Texas, torunadoes and hurricanes does not reflect the reality of the annual California fires.


Kind of like Puerto Rico and the hurricanes in 2017. Politics didn't cause the hurricanes but it caused the situation that when a strong one hit directly it would utterly wipe out the infrastructure.[/QUOTE]

[rogue06]

Undocumented assertion based on a highly biased agenda. By the evidence the intensity and extent of the fires over the years is based the intensity of the winds and heat. The winds and heat this year are greater than in previous years.




The response by the US government very well may have political overtones, but hurricanes are one off events, and the cause of the devastation of Puerto Rico is dominated by the severity of the hurricane, which was huge. As far as the weakness in the electric utilities go, well maybe, but considering the intensity of the hurricane all the utilities would have been wiped out anyway.

The only similarity here is the hurricane in Puerto Rico, and the weather conditions and fires in California were far more greater and devastating than any in recent years.

The power cutoffs were justified based on the evidence that some fires were caused by debris being blown into live power lines. The over development of the 'wilderness' regions simply requires more power lines and increased danger.

The bottomline is this overdevelopment of these 'wilderness' regions should not happen. People should know that living in these regions puts their property and personal safety at risk much greater than other regions. It is like developing the lowlands of the Mississippi Delta, unfortunately this has happened in the past.

The federal response wasn't the issue in PR. It was how badly that the island had been run. Numerous reports had been issued warning of catastrophic results if it took a direct hit from a big hurricane but things were allowed to continue to deteriorate. And after the hurricane the local government wouldn't let much needed supplies and equipment be released. There are notorious photos of several million bottles of water allowed to spoil sitting on a tarmac somewhere and the fact the feds were forced to send in armed agents to secure the equipment is telling.

[shunyadragon]

The federal response wasn't the issue in PR. It was how badly that the island had been run. Numerous reports had been issued warning of catastrophic results if it took a direct hit from a big hurricane but things were allowed to continue to deteriorate. And after the hurricane the local government wouldn't let much needed supplies and equipment be released. There are notorious photos of several million bottles of water allowed to spoil sitting on a tarmac somewhere and the fact the feds were forced to send in armed agents to secure the equipment is telling.

I think your going off the subject, but nonetheless it is telling what happens when the largest hurricane in recent history hits Puerto Rico. Yes, there is an issue concerning the Federal response, also considering the disdain Trump has for Puerto Rico in his own words, and the documented delayed response.

Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-disasters-puerto-rico/u-s-hurricane-response-slower-in-puerto-rico-than-in-florida-texas-study-idUSKCN1PU1YU

U.S. hurricane response slower in Puerto Rico than in Florida, Texas: study

© Copyright Original Source

By trying to deflect the subject to the hurricane of Puerto Rico, and off subject one off disasters like the 2010 Texas drought, you and others ignore the facts that it is well documented that the fires in California are annual predictable disaster events, and there severity is directly correlated to the severity of the annual drought, winds and temperatures.

[shunyadragon]

The federal response wasn't the issue in PR. It was how badly that the island had been run. Numerous reports had been issued warning of catastrophic results if it took a direct hit from a big hurricane but things were allowed to continue to deteriorate. And after the hurricane the local government wouldn't let much needed supplies and equipment be released. There are notorious photos of several million bottles of water allowed to spoil sitting on a tarmac somewhere and the fact the feds were forced to send in armed agents to secure the equipment is telling.

Also . . .

[rogue06]

I think your going off the subject, but nonetheless it is telling what happens when the largest hurricane in recent history hits Puerto Rico. Yes, there is an issue concerning the Federal response, also considering the disdain Trump has for Puerto Rico in his own words, and the documented delayed response.

Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-disasters-puerto-rico/u-s-hurricane-response-slower-in-puerto-rico-than-in-florida-texas-study-idUSKCN1PU1YU

U.S. hurricane response slower in Puerto Rico than in Florida, Texas: study

© Copyright Original Source

By trying to deflect the subject to the hurricane of Puerto Rico, and off subject one off disasters like the 2010 Texas drought, you and others ignore the facts that it is well documented that the fires in California are annual predictable disaster events, and there severity is directly correlated to the severity of the annual drought, winds and temperatures.

It was slower because PR is an island so it is very difficult to truck in people and supplies.

It takes significantly longer for me to fly from Florida to PR than it does for me to fly from Atlanta to Minneapolis.

And I'm not trying to distract attention from the drought and fires but used the hurricanes and PR as an example how politics can make a bad situation far worse -- which is what Teal and others were saying.

[shunyadragon]

It was slower because PR is an island so it is very difficult to truck in people and supplies.

It takes significantly longer for me to fly from Florida to PR than it does for me to fly from Atlanta to Minneapolis.

Poor darn excuse. My references referred to the delayed response regardless of logistics.

And I'm not trying to distract attention from the drought and fires but used the hurricanes and PR as an example how politics can make a bad situation far worse

You brought up the 2010 Texas drought. Why?!?!!? It has no relationship to the subject of the thread.

The point is clear that there is absolutely no relationship between politics and the fires in California. It is well documented in historical and geologic records that fires in California are an annual event for hundreds to thousands of year, and the only relationship is the intensity of the drought, winds and temperatures. This year the drought, winds and temperatures are more severe than most recent years. Political agendas like presented in this thread have no relationship with reality. The increased dangerous energizing of these regions is due to the problematic over development of the wilderness.

-- which is what Teal and others were saying.

As cited fundamentally wrong based on the facts of the history of the annual events are considered. There is still the issue of over development of these wilderness regions that further encourages the fires, people building in these regions with hazards to their life and property, and the expenditures by the state to deal with the fires and trying protect and save peoples lives.