“Catastrophic” Fire Conditions Arrive Early in Australia, Mirror the 2013 U.S. Wildfire Season
Melanie Fitzpatrick, climate scientist

October 23, 2013

My parents are almost 80 years old and live in Sydney, the place where they were born and raised. Yesterday I phoned them to ask for news of bush fires that are raging just beyond the western edge of the city. As they described the pall of dark smoke that has covered the city of over four million people, I thought of my childhood summers. We knew there would be searing temperatures and days of “total fire bans” when not even backyard barbeques were allowed. But I remember those days being during my summer vacations – that is, in December and January. Now they are happening in October, in springtime.

http://blog.ucsusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Sydney-Fires-Oct-2013.jpg
Smoke from a 200-mile fire front west of Sydney blankets the city. Image: Rex/Phil Hillyard/Newspix

Right now there are more than 60 fires blazing in the state of New South Wales, where one in three Australians lives. Temperatures are forecast to reach almost 100 degrees F with wind gusts over 60 miles per hour. A fire front almost 200 miles wide is threatening western Sydney.

The authorities have declared a state of emergency, with the situation into its sixth day with little sign of abatement. The Bureau of Meteorology has issued warnings this week that are typical of mid-summer, not spring. And for my parents, they just don’t recall spring conditions like this before. It’s like watching the weather on steroids.

Australia bracing for extreme fire season
This is the second time this year that the Australian wild fire rating system has risen to “catastrophic,” a designation that was used for the first time during the 2009 Australian fire season. The country has just had its warmest 12-month period on record, its warmest September on record, and has just come out of an exceptionally dry and warm winter.

Similar to conditions the U.S. Forest Service and other emergency responders were facing in the northern hemisphere this spring, Australia is facing a tumultuous start to the southern hemisphere fire season.

http://blog.ucsusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Attachment_FireDangerRating-2.jpg
The Australian bush fire danger rating scale now includes “catastrophic”. Source: NSW Fire Service

Fire behavior unprecedented
Fire seasons, of course, have great variability from year to year, but both in the U.S. and in Australia experts are saying the fire behaviors they are seeing are unprecedented.

In the western U.S., fire season is now two months longer than it was 40 years ago. According to the U.S. Forest Service, wildfires are increasing in frequency, intensity, and complexity. Wildfires are twice as large and three times more expensive as they were a decade ago. This past summer saw extreme and unprecedented behavior of fires in Colorado and California. The science is clear that humans have influenced global temperatures over the past half century. And the latest IPCC report states “future warming of extreme temperatures is virtually certain.”

Extreme temperatures, increased wildfire risk, higher costs
The costs of fighting wildfires across the U.S. have averaged more than $3 billion per year, and home protection contributes substantially to this amount. Nearly one-third of what the Forest Service spends each year to fight forest fires goes to resources and manpower to protect homes and structures, equating to more than $1 billion per year. The U.S. Forest Service is increasingly being strapped for funds as the wildfire seasons now lasts longer than it previously did and more people are building homes near forests.

[continued ...]

[... continued]

A recent forest study in Oregon showed when the average summertime temperature is just one degree Fahrenheit warmer, the cost of defending these homes doubles. Over the last several years, the Forest Service has used money meant for recreation and land management programs to fight fires. Decades ago, about 20 percent of the forestry budget was devoted to fire. But this last fiscal year, more than half of the U.S. Forest Service budget was spent on fighting wildfires.

With climate change now part of our daily lives, we are witnessing the beginnings of a very challenging problem for emergency managers. It is playing out for us in Australia today.

http://blog.ucsusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Aus-Bushfire-Oct-2013.jpg
Over 60 bush fires are blazing in the state of New South Wales, covering many areas with thick black smoke. Source: NSW Rural Fire Service

More alarmist drivel  ;D

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:49am:

More alarmist drivel  ;D

Apparently 80 years is a long time, when it comes to global climate change.  One can only laugh.

And, bush fires in spring are a new phenomenon.  Fascinating.

::)

rates of change: lol let us do another 80 billion characters forgetting rates of change why don't we??!!

::)

the uncertainty principle is all about measurement no matter what muso pretends it is and isn't about!!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 1:45pm:

the uncertainty principle is all about measurement no matter what muso pretends it is and isn't about!!

Quote:

In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle is any of a variety of mathematical inequalities asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle known as complementary variables, such as position x and momentum p, can be known simultaneously. For instance, the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa.

http://i.technet.microsoft.com/cc462812.fig01(en-us).gif

Don't confuse quantum mechanics with material physics in the macroscopic world.

I think I know what you're trying to say though.

How about asking the greenies why they have banned back burning and clearing of forests.

There's a reason why all this use to be done.

And now with these new tragic events in NSW its apparent why we used to back burn and clear.

Ajax wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 4:04pm:

How about asking the greenies why they have banned back burning and clearing of forests. .

I believe they did that in order to create firestorms so that they could push their global warming agenda.

Ajax wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 4:04pm:

How about asking the greenies why they have banned back burning and clearing of forests. There's a reason why all this use to be done. And now with these new tragic events in NSW its apparent why we used to back burn and clear.

The Greens in Australia are pathetic. They have been hijacked by marijuana smoking hippies and communists.

Hazard reduction burns are necessary. The Aborigines (even) understood that.

Actually after that post, I checked the Greens' NSW Website, and they don't seem to be opposed to Hazard Reduction burns. They are not even in power in fact.  So where exactly did you get your information from?

http://nsw.greens.org.au/policies/bushfires


Quote:

While recognising that controlled burning is only one form of bush fire risk reduction, The Greens have not been responsible for restricting its use. We are committed to an effective and scientifically based approach to hazard reduction, which takes into account the needs of both the human and natural environments.

Usually the Fire Service make decisions on the issuing of  permits on the basis of Risk Management, and they have been using the same protocol for years. 

If we are now having "catastrophic" fire conditions and things are only going to get worse what will they be calling fire conditions in the future?, Armageddon fire conditions?, apocalyptic fire conditions?, really f#ckin devilishly hotter than hell fire conditions?

I think they may have jumped the gun by going catastrophic too early, this is going to give real headaches to alarmists in the future trying to come up with scary adjectives to describe the prevailing fire conditions.

I think we should have maybe left the term "catastrophic" for a bit later on, right now we are really only at severe, dangerous or maybe extreme.


I hope this helps.  :)

Insurance companies realised way back in the 1990s that their premiums and even whether to insure people at all, should be informed by risks associated with the effects of Global warming and climate change

Money talks ladies and gentlemen.

muso wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 3:46pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Oct 26th, 2013 at 1:45pm: the uncertainty principle is all about measurement no matter what muso pretends it is and isn't about!! Quote: In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle is any of a variety of mathematical inequalities asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle known as complementary variables, such as position x and momentum p, can be known simultaneously. For instance, the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa. http://i.technet.microsoft.com/cc462812.fig01(en-us).gif Don't confuse quantum mechanics with material physics in the macroscopic world. I think I know what you're trying to say though.

haven't seen the Heisenberg uncertainty equation/principle for at least 3 weeks

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 8:58pm:

Insurance companies realised way back in the 1990s that their premiums and even whether to insure people at all, should be informed by risks associated with the effects of Global warming and climate change Money talks ladies and gentlemen.

Yes it does, and Insurance professionals get their risk assessments pretty close to spot on. From my experience, they are getting better at it every year. 

Ajax wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 4:04pm:

How about asking the greenies why they have banned back burning and clearing of forests. There's a reason why all this use to be done. And now with these new tragic events in NSW its apparent why we used to back burn and clear.

are the Greenies in charge of everything?

about 70% of the forest cover in Victoria alone has been cleared since the British invaded and thieved this land in 1788.

You gate trees now?

a source of oxygen for you to breathe?

muso wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 8:12pm:

Actually after that post, I checked the Greens' NSW Website, and they don't seem to be opposed to Hazard Reduction burns. They are not even in power in fact.  So where exactly did you get your information from? http://nsw.greens.org.au/policies/bushfires Quote: While recognising that controlled burning is only one form of bush fire risk reduction, The Greens have not been responsible for restricting its use. We are committed to an effective and scientifically based approach to hazard reduction, which takes into account the needs of both the human and natural environments. Usually the Fire Service make decisions on the issuing of  permits on the basis of Risk Management, and they have been using the same protocol for years.

Not in all cases Muso. Often the permits are issued by local government (depending on state laws). And the 'Greenies' mentioned are not the Greens party per se but rather councillors/local government employees of an environnazi' bent.

muso wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 8:12pm:

Actually after that post, I checked the Greens' NSW Website, and they don't seem to be opposed to Hazard Reduction burns. They are not even in power in fact.  So where exactly did you get your information from? http://nsw.greens.org.au/policies/bushfires Quote: While recognising that controlled burning is only one form of bush fire risk reduction, The Greens have not been responsible for restricting its use. We are committed to an effective and scientifically based approach to hazard reduction, which takes into account the needs of both the human and natural environments. Usually the Fire Service make decisions on the issuing of  permits on the basis of Risk Management, and they have been using the same protocol for years.

Quote:

Why greenies only make me see red Miranda Devine Tuesday,   October   22,   2013  (7:26pm) BILL Leak, acclaimed cartoonist, lives in one of the loveliest places in Australia: Killcare, on the Central Coast. But one of the consequences of living in the middle of the Australian bush is fire. And in pretty seachange and treechange communities, you’re likely to find yourself in a greenie council dominated by refugees from the city who haven’t a clue about the real dangers of living among trees. So it is that at the start of a dangerous bushfire season, Leak finds himself with a backyard full of trees and flammable material that he is forbidden to clear by Gosford Council on threat of fines as high as $1.1 million. “Here I am, living on the edge of bushland that could burst into flame at any time, and I’m not allowed to clear the land in my own backyard of trees that, in the event of a fire, will bring the fire straight into my home,” he says. Council flora preservation policies warn that the removal of any native tree over 3m can attract hefty fines. This “puts homes like mine in grave danger: the refusal of local councils to allow home owners to remove trees that can extend the bushland right up to our own back doors,” Leak says. “The only possible explanation for this is the council is hell-bent on securing Green votes. I’ll accept, albeit unwillingly, the indulgence of Greens fantasies up to a point but if and when they cost me my house I think I’ll have to say, ‘A line has been crossed’.” Yes indeed. How many warnings do councils need before they understand that tea trees and eucalypts and other lovely natives, not to mention shrubs and organic litter on the ground, are lethal near homes in fireprone areas. It’s bad enough that properties are being burned out by unstoppable infernos that erupt out of neglected national parks. But to actively stop people from protecting their homes by forbidding them to remove fire fuel on their own land is insanity. Gosford Council is not alone, or even the worst. the rest here http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/why_greenies_only_make_me_see_red/

Remember the United Nations Agenda 21 its already happening in Australia

Read it.
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

http://youtu.be/k52J9AoUW24

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 26^th, 2013 at 10:18pm:

Ajax wrote on Oct 26th, 2013 at 4:04pm: How about asking the greenies why they have banned back burning and clearing of forests. There's a reason why all this use to be done. And now with these new tragic events in NSW its apparent why we used to back burn and clear. are the Greenies in charge of everything? about 70% of the forest cover in Victoria alone has been cleared since the British invaded and thieved this land in 1788. You gate trees now? a source of oxygen for you to breathe?

Why is it then that many Australians living in bush fire zones complain about the green policies that wont let them clear their land............??????

Ajax wrote on Oct 27^th, 2013 at 11:34am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 26th, 2013 at 10:18pm: Ajax wrote on Oct 26th, 2013 at 4:04pm: How about asking the greenies why they have banned back burning and clearing of forests. There's a reason why all this use to be done. And now with these new tragic events in NSW its apparent why we used to back burn and clear. are the Greenies in charge of everything? about 70% of the forest cover in Victoria alone has been cleared since the British invaded and thieved this land in 1788. You gate trees now? a source of oxygen for you to breathe? Why is it then that many Australians living in bush fire zones complain about the green policies that wont let them clear their land............??????

Are you saying that these policies and laws are implemented by the Green party?

really?


You want a continent that is totally void of trees?

What is the Australian law concerning what forests an tree cover can be cleared

Victoria has cleared 70% of its forests and tree cover since 1788, and there are still bush fires - in fact the most destructive bush fire occurred in 2009.

And some trees and vegetation actually require fire to germinate.

Bush fires are part of the landscape. The indigenous people lived with, adapted and managed these fires very well for many tens of thousands of years.

What do you think Ajax? Do you think bush fire frequency and intensity will worsen as the globe warms up?