Trump blames Biden and California Gov. Gavin Newsom for deadly wildfires

This is undoubtedly true as far as the spread of the fire into neighborhoods. If all homes were up to highest level codes (esp in the dense areas), there would no fuel for the fires to burn. The city environment should be a proverbial concrete wall.

But in the less dense areas where the landscape provided the fuel, assuming some # of these homes had these “fire-resistant” roofs and siding materials and burned anyway. Some of these homes must have had flame blowing directly against them, not just floating embers. That was my point as far as “fire-resistant” vs “fire-proof”.

Not sure about how many would have had fire rated windows. Maybe if you have all those pieces… I’m just saying I’d assume some of the multi-million estate properties must have had those boxes checked including the upgraded windows.

 

Residential doesn’t have fireproof windows that I’ve ever seen. We’ve installed them in high rises with windows too close to another structure. They’re extraordinarily thick and have a gel layer between layers of glass to give it a fire rating. I assume others areas are igniting on a home well before the windows become a problem though.

 

Thanks for the reply.

Found this article on making your house really fire resistant but not really fireproof. (I refuse to think it can't be done however. I bet Elon could do it).
Fire-Resistant Building Materials: 9 Ways to Build a the Most Fire-Resistant Home - NewHomeSource.com

 

in a remote setting, I would spec a pump on a well with secondary power to supply enough water to keep the roof wet.

homes with pumps set to run from pool to soak house survived due to those systems

im fairly certain the code addresses trees and landscaping in proximity to the structures a spart of the overall approach

 

It’s not something I’d ever heard of. That type of fire protection doesn’t seem to be a concern in FL, here we are worried more about hurricane impact glass and insulated windows.

It seems to exist, or at least there are product lines marketed that way. No clue if there’s any meaningful # installed or if it would even matter. I’d think at least some “spare no expense” home might have such a thing? But I can only speculate.

 

Fact check: What really happened with the Pacific Palisades water hydrants? | LAist

“There is a theoretical world, and maybe a world we're entering into, where we could pay much, much more to have redundant water and power supply — because you need both [to fight fire], especially in terrains like this,” Pierce said. “I'm not even sure that would have made a difference when it comes to these types of wildfires, but that's possible.”

Pierce said that level of financial commitment would be “incredibly expensive,” but that’s what would be needed in order to keep fire hydrants running — especially in mountainous or hilly regions where local agencies also have to contend with pumping water uphill.

“There's no reason to think that DWP was particularly ill-prepared, no one was talking about them being ill-prepared for wildfires,” he said. “This caught everyone off guard, as far as I know.”

 

Architect designs "totally fireproof" houses. $400,000 to $1,000,000. He actually calls it fire resistant but it seems close to fireproof. Can handle high winds too.

BOSTON -
For the past three and half years [architect Gary Henden has] been designing a Sustainable Alternative Modular House, better known as the SAM House. He says it's a climate responsive house made up of non-organic materials.

The wall panels themself and the roof panels are all made of the exact same material. It is a concrete, non-flammable waterproof material. Not regular concrete. This is 12,000 psi concrete very dense, which is what makes it totally fireproof," he said.

We are really calling SAM House a disaster replacement house. It's not only just the exterior skin of the building. It's every material in the building, does not have any flame spread," he said.
https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/massachusetts-architect-fireproof

 

A species of cypress tree seems to be remarkable resistant to fires. Perhaps they could form fire barriers to slow the spread of fires in the future.
Enigma of the trees that resist wildfires

 

My former follower on X (Twitter) Scott Adams has some assumptions he wants his followers to vet:

"Scott Adams
@ScottAdamsSays
I need a fact-check on my current assumptions about rebuilding after the fire:

1. It can take years to get anything approved in normal times in California. The backlog from the fire could push it out a decade.

2. The cost of building a custom home in California is roughly double the market value of the home when done.

3. The new home will get a property tax step-up to become unaffordable for anyone who owned the original home for a decade or more.

4. The fire risk will return once everything regrows, and insurance companies will not come back. Here I assume continued state incompetence.

5. There are not enough qualified builders to rebuild.

6. Owners would be rebuilding in the midst of unchecked and growing crime."

 

This should make things easier.

Newsom Suspends State Environmental Rules for Rebuilding After Fires

 

Newsome expanded cally healthcare to all illegals last Jan at the tune of about 2.6 billion. Cally could have spent some of that money on police and fire and been ahead of the game

 

Interesting that in Cali they still don’t even do controlled burned in what you consider rural( maricopa). Why? Hint, it’s the same reason they don’t do them near Malibu etc. Nobody is advocating controlled burns on a cul de sac….:but Yes they absolutely can do controlled burns and clear brush in the surrounding hills around Malibu etc. That’s where the fires are started and grow into monsters on on all that fuel. As far as prop 1. The fact that 10 years later they are yet to break ground on a single project, and further as you point out, they have ‘plans’ to build but seemingly chose areas that are father away from high hazard fire area would indicate the decisions to maybe have possible plans 10 years later was yet another political decision vs needs based decision

 

Cali new rules requiring insurers to provide fire coverage in exchange for rate increases went into effect last month...
Just before wildfires hit, California told insurers to cover homes in risky areas. In return, they can pass on a key cost to customers

In the final days of 2024, the state of California announced a new regulation that was meant to help homeowners in risky areas obtain more access to insurance.

The rule, which goes into effect later this month, requires carriers to offer coverage in wildfire-prone regions over time, specifically, by 5% every two years until they reach at least 85% of their statewide market share, according to a statement from Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara’s office on Dec. 30. In return, insurers can incorporate reinsurance costs in their calculations for what they will charge consumers.

"Californians deserve a reliable insurance market that doesn’t retreat from communities most vulnerable to wildfires and climate change," Lara said in the statement at the time, noting that all other states allow insurers to pass on reinsurance costs.

That's after carriers have been fleeing the state in recent years, driven out by increasingly costly weather events, including previous fires that have wiped out company profits. In fact, State Farm dropped nearly 70% of its policies in Pacific Palisades last year.

 

But they actually do controlled burns. So that info is false.

See page 13 of this report for their burn totals.

https://wildfiretaskforce.org/wp-co...-for-expanding-the-use-of-beneficial-fire.pdf

Maybe they don’t do enough of them, or some areas around where these fires started were “on the radar” but not taken care of.

I think you are oversimplifying. After a major destructive wildfire it’s kind of like “no shit, they should have mitigated”. The question is how, when, where. They cant just start burning when it’s dry/risky as they might create the very thing they would be attempting to mitigate. They can’t just burn all the natural brush off the hills in winter as that leaves them vulnerable to mudslides. Mudslides are going to be a future issue even for properties that escaped the fires. This isn’t even supposed to be their fire season, just last year it was unusually wet (and it wouldn’t be surprising that extra rain spurred some of the growth that was fuel for this years fires). They’d better hope they don’t get some similar major rain event in the coming months or it will be mudslides galore without that vegetation helping keep the slopes in place.

 

The first time I saw LA, in 1992, I was struck by how brown it was.

I can hardly imagine what chunks of it look now.

 

Newsom looks like he could do his own signing at his press conferences …

 

No, California is not stopping Oregon fire trucks for emissions testing, officials say

From Altadena

AIR7 maps out Altadena damage from Eaton Fire

 

US Forest Service Decision to Halt Prescribed Burns in California is History Repeating

 

You realize that your own article states that the state government, tribal groups, and private associations are all doing controlled burns, right? It is in the second sentence of the article.

 

The scoreboard so far:



surely tech will catch up, right?
also TS’s BF donated $1m to LA fire recovery