With 8.2 billion people in the world, the demand for modern lighting, heating, water, transportation, etc is greatly desired, particularly by those in less developed areas. It seems to me, a popular cultural behavior has always superior to a government mandate. In other words, if our family behavior were to conserve energy (turning out lights at night, not letting water run unnecessarily at the kitchen sink, etc etc) then we would use less energy. Government mandated laws would be silly. Culture is more powerful than laws.
Legislation based on mere anecdote is the real crime.
Why do we keep electing and re-electing these cartoon bubble thinking rocket scientists. Why do we replace them with more of the same, after"term limits" absolve us from making real election choices based upon their actual merit.
What are these "climate" ruses masking, that they really don't want to talk about.
Instead of burying your head in the sand and ignoring climate change, perhaps you should begin a gradual transition to energy efficiency and wean yourself off fossil fuel? That would spread the cost out over several years. Also, by waiting until the imposed deadline arrives you will be competing with all the other procrastinators and deniers, which will make your transition even more expensive. Many homeowners with foresight have already adopted many of these changes, and they did so without "forced" government requirements. My own brother has been living "off the grid" for several years now, and I am headed that way. Just like my grandfather, who hung up his buggy whip and put his horse out to pasture to acquire a 19th century internal combustion engine, I am "hanging up" on fossil fueled vehicles and appliances and living in the 21st century. If you wait until the deadline arrives, you will be only exacerbating the cost to yourself and the harm to our planet.
Good example. The use of "climate change" as a thing, with no justification. This needs to be weeded out of our political dialogue. It is both useless and punitive to continue being lead around by the mere utterance of "climate change".
Not everyone has the financial resources to 'get ahead of the curve' and do these upgrades now. The estimated cost noted in the article of 15-20K for a reroof is low for most homes in our area.
That is my point. You do not have to do it "all at once." My old shingles needed to be replaced, so I had that done, followed by installation of solar panels. 2 years later I had a storage battery installed. When my old ICE van needs replaced, I will buy a used electric car and will then be able to plug it in to my panels and battery to recharge. When my old gas water heater gave up the ghost, I replaced it with an electric water heater. Over time I am replacing things I would need to replace anyway, I am just not replacing them with gas-burning tech. The cost? It was less than my cable TV bill, which I have since cancelled, so my month-to-month expenses are a "wash" and I am not spending all that time sitting on my butt watching TV.
Exactly, so why not make the "personal choice" to do it now and avoid the added cost when it is mandated. Mandate or no mandate, when PG&E cuts off the power because of fire danger, my lights stay lit and my refrigerator still runs.
Huh? Under threat of mandate is not a personal choice; it is extortion. For what end.
You added a new dimension -do it now because you will be sorry when the power goes off due to mismanagement of the grid. I thought this was about "climate change". Now you are arguing, do it because of public utility mismanagement. You dropped into your own rabbit hole.
Shutting down the grid to prevent wildfires is "mismanagement of the grid"? I would argue that it is prudent. This conversation was never about "climate change," it was about how to avoid some of the pending costs associated converting from gas-fueled appliances. Are you not paying attention?
Never mind electric furnaces, water heaters and EV’s, what about a more pressing issue like LA burning to the ground! This man made catastrophe has made a once beautiful city into a moonscape. To say heads need to roll is an understatement, beginning with Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass. Yes, it seems Bass was cornered in an airport and was speechless when confronted by a foreign news crew. Bass was asked “why she supported cutting $17 million from LAFD?”
Clearly, there is a need for a criminal investigation into how fire fighters ran out of water and the disaster which ensued. No doubt resulting in the trillions in damages, insurance companies are now bound to flee in mass. This entire calamity is on the scale of 911 or an atomic bomb going off.
All of this carnage needs to be put SQUARELY on the backs of the corrupt and criminal Democrat machine which runs our state!
No point just rolling heads, when we keep replacing them with more of the same. Downside of "term limits" - no one knows anything. And worse, no one even has to care. A few terms and they are out regardless - all institutional history and learning is gone. The Sword of Damocles has been removed from any legislators head.
Would having stress-tested their capacity to respond to known perils have made a difference? Only if they did something about the results, like demanding reservoirs get refilled as a critical priority.
There was an awful lot of multimillion dollar talent in the LAFD that seemed to not put in honest days work, planning and preventing, let alone leaving their desks to actually carry hoses to dry hydrants. (See Transparent California) But we all speak prematurely at this point.
What will this do to Calif property tax collections is another hurdle down the road.
“If these rules are implemented, the value of your home will go to zero" Really? It seems a little hysterical..... Or I don't understand the math he's using.
What will be the value of a non-electric vehicle in California? Zero. Similar thinking - though probably cheaper to make the conversions to a home, than to covert an old Chevy to run on squirrel wheel energy.
For what net benefit, is the real issue. Climate change is not a thing, yet it goes unquestioned in order justify egregious and unfounded personal property attacks.
OK, let's give you a hall pass on climate change. From what I've read, just as big of reasoning SCAQMD wants to phase out gas stoves are the health risks associated with breathing nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde, carbon monoxide, benzene,etc. produced by them. Are those "not a thing" as well?
There was great criticism of the "study" they used to justify these alleged gas stove complaints. So that also continues to be a rule by anecdote decision. The discussion of this latest over-reach was fairly recent so it should be easy to find where the controversies exist. Best to regulate only what you can measure, for later assessment of cost, benefits, cause and effect.
"Climate change" is an ever-changing squish. And hugely expensive with no discernible impact. It falls apart instantly whenever put to any objective testing. Which is what science is all about. Right now, it is all sound and fury ....... signifying nothing.
In order to maintain fire insurance I have on a cabin in the Sierra I had to replace my propane water heater with an electric one. The old gas WH was in need of replacement and the new electric one cost the same as a gas one of the same capacity. This replacement also allowed me to forego having to run expensive insulated "type B" venting up through two floors and the roof; hence, saving me a lot of money over what would have been a pricey gas installation and, since our power there is generated from renewable hydroelectric and solar sources, we can heat our cabin with clean emissions and clear consciousness. Just sayin'.
RJ: Who made you feel guilty about your "emissions" - which emissions? From the manufacturing of any redundancy replacements now required? The disposal of the old units, or the factual linkage between gas water heaters being a leading cause of mass destruction forest fires?
A new solar roof panel ........................... Uh fact check. There are an increasing number of solar installation companies who are quitting or bankrupt. 3 just in SY Valley in the past 2 months.
The State of Caif. has changed the rules and the subsidy is going away. If you add the number of panels or replace your panels the new rules apply and you have to pay full costs and the grid feed is being stopped often. So guess what the conversion to electric homes and cars is going to cost the working poor and middle class dearly. So much for being for the workers.
It is interesting that the AQMD IS NOT ELECTED yet they are making rules that should have to go through the Legislature. Want to bet there will be a whole bunch of Democrats that will not be elected or reelected if that were the case?
Who are two strong armed politicians in SB County? Limon & Hart. Both have boasted about their support for anti car and outrageously expensive electric options.
Look around the fire devastation and and see how efficient emergency vehicle use will be when electricity lines are gone.
As the actual author of the complete article, I geve credit the the two originators of the lead in paragraphs.
There appears to have been a misunderstanding about the author who submitted it for publication and unwittingly, Stephen Frank became the named author. I am surprised at how my humble contribution has taken some of you down so many alleys.
My main point was not aimed at the prosperous members who write and comment on articles written here. It was an attempt to draw attention to the majority of the forty million residents of California who will not have the incomes or savings to afford the the government dictated conversion of their gas, oil, and gasoline fueled possessions, over the next ten, or more, years.
My contention on these matters is emphasized greatly the exposures of government incompetence, waste, and deliberate crimes of not preparing for more immediat, known and primal threats that are now exposed by the great fires California.
Also exposed by the fires is that the combination of years-long droughts since the 1960's, have not been met by any adequate development and implementation of an effective water increasing strategy as the population grew too 40 million.
It just surprises me immensely, as a newcomer, that the people of California have not risen up in anger long before this, at election times, to remove from office, those who are supposed to be representatives of the people, not the party
Yes, I read this bilge this morning. The piece by Edhat, Liar-in-Chief, Jerry Roberts was especially vile and only goes to show how much of a talentless “journalist “ he pretends to be!
Op-ED: A Clown Car of Grifters and Hacks in D.C., A Breath of Fresh Air in SB
Let’s face it Sacto (sacjon?), you’re a hater of ANYONE AND EVERYONE who isn’t in your ultraliberal world view on anything and everyth8ng. Of course you hate that site.
I think it’s interesting how the posters on SB Current all put their real names on their posts while almost no one here on Edhat does - for good reason! Lots of haters and nastiness right here. The haters here are all Democrats. So negative and nasty. Chill.
Contributing Edhat POS, “Sacjon” carries the water for the local left agenda. Ya, a real Pit bull for anyone who dares to think outside of the lefty rubicon. Do they realize how stupid they sound on a totally biased and compromised “news sight?”
Are the stinking losers who are running CA out of their frigging minds? ? ?
We need to Dump the Dems and get a Trump-clone governor and a bunch of sensible GOP pros to manage the state. The only way this solar/wind crap is gonna work is when it becomes as cheap as gas.
I don’t know anything about nuclear, but it seems that it’s getting cheaper, safer & more efficient.
I suggest a new watchdog group called C.R.A.P. - Citizen Review And Protest. We gotta find a way to get the current Commie-Dem administration _O-U-T_ !
Perhaps Trump will intervene what's going on in California with the "save the fish" programs, allowing lack of water to put out fires in cities now burning to the ground. Or California dictating energy sources that can be used. These are clear cases of California gone zonkers. What more proof do you need seeing what's happening in Los Angeles? With only an ounce of common sense applied, both political parties have to accept there's something wrong in "River City." The Los Angeles fire storm with no water for fire hydrants is a disaster destroying the Democrats for at least a decade, IMO. The Dems can blame it all on the winds ... but no water to put out a fire is another story that will not accept any excuse for even a casual observer. What century do we live in, anyway? The Feds need to take over the state of California.
Simple hydraulics; four times the designed maximum water usage rate for a 15 hour straight event caused the higher elevation reservoirs not being able to replenish themselves. NO amount of additional water deliveries would have changed this. Only a costly, massive upsizing (replacement) of ALL water transmission, trunk and distribution water mains would lead to an improvement of the fill rates.
Perhaps the Orangeman will bring back infrastructure week!
The existing water main sizing/capacity is the issue, not the availability of water.
Sir Pete, if you were a designer of a city water system, you would take into account worst case scenarios. Your argument is worthless and nonsensical. I can tell you have no design experience as I have, so you are forgiven for not how most of the world works. There were flaws in the system that are inexcusable to allow what happened in LA ... period.
If you use equipment designed for handling saltwater corrosion; definitely. If considerations were thought out prior to this emergency, saltwater usage could have been mechanized to fill containers not adapted for long-term saltwater usage. Afterall, fresh water could wash out saltwater residue. It's all in the pre-planning which should be done under extreme conditions. You make a good point and it's valid. But obviously, nobody gave the saltwater usage concept much of a thought which appears as a major oversight considering the mess LA is into with rebuilding with no insurance.
I did hear the argument that if saltwater soaked land then nothing would grow there in the future, but seems like if it could stop the fire from completely leveling the buildings that would be something that could be dealt with.
I'm dreading driving the PCH and seeing the little beachfront houses all gone.
"Water water everywhere, and not a drop to drink."
I read the same comment and can only conclude it's a leftist comment thinking more about plants than $5M homes that people don't have replacement insurance. After all, the scooper aircraft from Canada are dumping ocean water, so the "salt water" argument is BS. Our country has people that can come up with "salt water" solutions. Right now, a vegetation reduction actually sounds good! If you have a home next to the ocean and have a water pump to pump ocean water to save your home, sure as heck you'll use the ocean water.
When I once lived in a fire area, I considered adding a large polyurethane tank to hold water with pump and fire department size hosing. Simply watering down the area surrounding your home can help. And beating the fire department to the punch to put out a fire doesn't hurt.
The “worst case scenarios” that you posit are flawed. These LA county & city municipal water systems were designed many decades ago. Since that time, major development and population increases render the water mains as grossly undersized. This is why new infrastructure capital improvements to water main sizing are a normal practice. All a civil engineer needs to do is run hydraulic calculations that meet current and reasonable future demand, hopefully taking into account climate change.
Peter, you are lost in a world of make believe. Get a degree in engineering and then answer these questions and you will not use the term "climate change."
The "Feds" already took over California in 1846. Unchecked population growth since then have created the problems we are facing today. Water shortage? How about building desalination plants? Or getting rid of grass lawns and golf courses? Getting rid of grass lawns would also rid California of the noise and air pollution of gas-powered lawn mowers and leaf-blowers - a definite win-win!
How about everyone living in California getting a copy of their birth certificate and looking for the block that indicates "place of birth" AND THEN GOING THERE. That would solve most of California's problems. If you don't like it here, go back where you came from and then try to make it HALF as nice as California.
With 8.2 billion people in the world, the demand for modern lighting, heating, water, transportation, etc is greatly desired, particularly by those in less developed areas. It seems to me, a popular cultural behavior has always superior to a government mandate. In other words, if our family behavior were to conserve energy (turning out lights at night, not letting water run unnecessarily at the kitchen sink, etc etc) then we would use less energy. Government mandated laws would be silly. Culture is more powerful than laws.
Legislation based on mere anecdote is the real crime.
Why do we keep electing and re-electing these cartoon bubble thinking rocket scientists. Why do we replace them with more of the same, after"term limits" absolve us from making real election choices based upon their actual merit.
What are these "climate" ruses masking, that they really don't want to talk about.
Instead of burying your head in the sand and ignoring climate change, perhaps you should begin a gradual transition to energy efficiency and wean yourself off fossil fuel? That would spread the cost out over several years. Also, by waiting until the imposed deadline arrives you will be competing with all the other procrastinators and deniers, which will make your transition even more expensive. Many homeowners with foresight have already adopted many of these changes, and they did so without "forced" government requirements. My own brother has been living "off the grid" for several years now, and I am headed that way. Just like my grandfather, who hung up his buggy whip and put his horse out to pasture to acquire a 19th century internal combustion engine, I am "hanging up" on fossil fueled vehicles and appliances and living in the 21st century. If you wait until the deadline arrives, you will be only exacerbating the cost to yourself and the harm to our planet.
Good example. The use of "climate change" as a thing, with no justification. This needs to be weeded out of our political dialogue. It is both useless and punitive to continue being lead around by the mere utterance of "climate change".
Not everyone has the financial resources to 'get ahead of the curve' and do these upgrades now. The estimated cost noted in the article of 15-20K for a reroof is low for most homes in our area.
That is my point. You do not have to do it "all at once." My old shingles needed to be replaced, so I had that done, followed by installation of solar panels. 2 years later I had a storage battery installed. When my old ICE van needs replaced, I will buy a used electric car and will then be able to plug it in to my panels and battery to recharge. When my old gas water heater gave up the ghost, I replaced it with an electric water heater. Over time I am replacing things I would need to replace anyway, I am just not replacing them with gas-burning tech. The cost? It was less than my cable TV bill, which I have since cancelled, so my month-to-month expenses are a "wash" and I am not spending all that time sitting on my butt watching TV.
SS: You are making an argument for personal choice; it issue is mandated drop dead dates.
Exactly, so why not make the "personal choice" to do it now and avoid the added cost when it is mandated. Mandate or no mandate, when PG&E cuts off the power because of fire danger, my lights stay lit and my refrigerator still runs.
Huh? Under threat of mandate is not a personal choice; it is extortion. For what end.
You added a new dimension -do it now because you will be sorry when the power goes off due to mismanagement of the grid. I thought this was about "climate change". Now you are arguing, do it because of public utility mismanagement. You dropped into your own rabbit hole.
Shutting down the grid to prevent wildfires is "mismanagement of the grid"? I would argue that it is prudent. This conversation was never about "climate change," it was about how to avoid some of the pending costs associated converting from gas-fueled appliances. Are you not paying attention?
I can see that you have bought into the man made global warming hoax hook, line and sinker.
Pathetic
Never mind electric furnaces, water heaters and EV’s, what about a more pressing issue like LA burning to the ground! This man made catastrophe has made a once beautiful city into a moonscape. To say heads need to roll is an understatement, beginning with Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass. Yes, it seems Bass was cornered in an airport and was speechless when confronted by a foreign news crew. Bass was asked “why she supported cutting $17 million from LAFD?”
Clearly, there is a need for a criminal investigation into how fire fighters ran out of water and the disaster which ensued. No doubt resulting in the trillions in damages, insurance companies are now bound to flee in mass. This entire calamity is on the scale of 911 or an atomic bomb going off.
All of this carnage needs to be put SQUARELY on the backs of the corrupt and criminal Democrat machine which runs our state!
No point just rolling heads, when we keep replacing them with more of the same. Downside of "term limits" - no one knows anything. And worse, no one even has to care. A few terms and they are out regardless - all institutional history and learning is gone. The Sword of Damocles has been removed from any legislators head.
Would double the size of the LAFD have made much of a difference in these Santa Ana driven fires?
Would having stress-tested their capacity to respond to known perils have made a difference? Only if they did something about the results, like demanding reservoirs get refilled as a critical priority.
There was an awful lot of multimillion dollar talent in the LAFD that seemed to not put in honest days work, planning and preventing, let alone leaving their desks to actually carry hoses to dry hydrants. (See Transparent California) But we all speak prematurely at this point.
What will this do to Calif property tax collections is another hurdle down the road.
All the blown up and exposed plumbing in 5000 incinerated houses could leak enough to parch all the filled reservoirs many times over.
“If these rules are implemented, the value of your home will go to zero" Really? It seems a little hysterical..... Or I don't understand the math he's using.
What will be the value of a non-electric vehicle in California? Zero. Similar thinking - though probably cheaper to make the conversions to a home, than to covert an old Chevy to run on squirrel wheel energy.
For what net benefit, is the real issue. Climate change is not a thing, yet it goes unquestioned in order justify egregious and unfounded personal property attacks.
OK, let's give you a hall pass on climate change. From what I've read, just as big of reasoning SCAQMD wants to phase out gas stoves are the health risks associated with breathing nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde, carbon monoxide, benzene,etc. produced by them. Are those "not a thing" as well?
There was great criticism of the "study" they used to justify these alleged gas stove complaints. So that also continues to be a rule by anecdote decision. The discussion of this latest over-reach was fairly recent so it should be easy to find where the controversies exist. Best to regulate only what you can measure, for later assessment of cost, benefits, cause and effect.
"Climate change" is an ever-changing squish. And hugely expensive with no discernible impact. It falls apart instantly whenever put to any objective testing. Which is what science is all about. Right now, it is all sound and fury ....... signifying nothing.
See: The Cold Truth About Climate Change - trust and verity this too: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt31851190/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Agreed, but I would like to see the reality of the math of the expense to change over:)
In order to maintain fire insurance I have on a cabin in the Sierra I had to replace my propane water heater with an electric one. The old gas WH was in need of replacement and the new electric one cost the same as a gas one of the same capacity. This replacement also allowed me to forego having to run expensive insulated "type B" venting up through two floors and the roof; hence, saving me a lot of money over what would have been a pricey gas installation and, since our power there is generated from renewable hydroelectric and solar sources, we can heat our cabin with clean emissions and clear consciousness. Just sayin'.
RJ: Who made you feel guilty about your "emissions" - which emissions? From the manufacturing of any redundancy replacements now required? The disposal of the old units, or the factual linkage between gas water heaters being a leading cause of mass destruction forest fires?
A new solar roof panel ........................... Uh fact check. There are an increasing number of solar installation companies who are quitting or bankrupt. 3 just in SY Valley in the past 2 months.
The State of Caif. has changed the rules and the subsidy is going away. If you add the number of panels or replace your panels the new rules apply and you have to pay full costs and the grid feed is being stopped often. So guess what the conversion to electric homes and cars is going to cost the working poor and middle class dearly. So much for being for the workers.
It is interesting that the AQMD IS NOT ELECTED yet they are making rules that should have to go through the Legislature. Want to bet there will be a whole bunch of Democrats that will not be elected or reelected if that were the case?
Who are two strong armed politicians in SB County? Limon & Hart. Both have boasted about their support for anti car and outrageously expensive electric options.
Look around the fire devastation and and see how efficient emergency vehicle use will be when electricity lines are gone.
As the actual author of the complete article, I geve credit the the two originators of the lead in paragraphs.
There appears to have been a misunderstanding about the author who submitted it for publication and unwittingly, Stephen Frank became the named author. I am surprised at how my humble contribution has taken some of you down so many alleys.
My main point was not aimed at the prosperous members who write and comment on articles written here. It was an attempt to draw attention to the majority of the forty million residents of California who will not have the incomes or savings to afford the the government dictated conversion of their gas, oil, and gasoline fueled possessions, over the next ten, or more, years.
My contention on these matters is emphasized greatly the exposures of government incompetence, waste, and deliberate crimes of not preparing for more immediat, known and primal threats that are now exposed by the great fires California.
Also exposed by the fires is that the combination of years-long droughts since the 1960's, have not been met by any adequate development and implementation of an effective water increasing strategy as the population grew too 40 million.
It just surprises me immensely, as a newcomer, that the people of California have not risen up in anger long before this, at election times, to remove from office, those who are supposed to be representatives of the people, not the party
Derek Hanley
Stepping on a rake.
(Off topic) EdHat rocket scientist commenters weigh in on Santa Barbara Current: I guess their houses do not believe love is love: https://www.edhat.com/news/op-ed-a-clown-car-of-grifters-and-hacks-in-d-c-a-breath-of-fresh-air-in-sb/#comment-191263
Yes, I read this bilge this morning. The piece by Edhat, Liar-in-Chief, Jerry Roberts was especially vile and only goes to show how much of a talentless “journalist “ he pretends to be!
EdHat: PENALTY COMMENT
Basicinfo805
Op-ED: A Clown Car of Grifters and Hacks in D.C., A Breath of Fresh Air in SB
Let’s face it Sacto (sacjon?), you’re a hater of ANYONE AND EVERYONE who isn’t in your ultraliberal world view on anything and everyth8ng. Of course you hate that site.
I think it’s interesting how the posters on SB Current all put their real names on their posts while almost no one here on Edhat does - for good reason! Lots of haters and nastiness right here. The haters here are all Democrats. So negative and nasty. Chill.
Contributing Edhat POS, “Sacjon” carries the water for the local left agenda. Ya, a real Pit bull for anyone who dares to think outside of the lefty rubicon. Do they realize how stupid they sound on a totally biased and compromised “news sight?”
Are the stinking losers who are running CA out of their frigging minds? ? ?
We need to Dump the Dems and get a Trump-clone governor and a bunch of sensible GOP pros to manage the state. The only way this solar/wind crap is gonna work is when it becomes as cheap as gas.
I don’t know anything about nuclear, but it seems that it’s getting cheaper, safer & more efficient.
I suggest a new watchdog group called C.R.A.P. - Citizen Review And Protest. We gotta find a way to get the current Commie-Dem administration _O-U-T_ !
Natural gas is clean burning fuel and we have enough in this country to last for at least a hundred years.
True.
Perhaps Trump will intervene what's going on in California with the "save the fish" programs, allowing lack of water to put out fires in cities now burning to the ground. Or California dictating energy sources that can be used. These are clear cases of California gone zonkers. What more proof do you need seeing what's happening in Los Angeles? With only an ounce of common sense applied, both political parties have to accept there's something wrong in "River City." The Los Angeles fire storm with no water for fire hydrants is a disaster destroying the Democrats for at least a decade, IMO. The Dems can blame it all on the winds ... but no water to put out a fire is another story that will not accept any excuse for even a casual observer. What century do we live in, anyway? The Feds need to take over the state of California.
Billy,
Simple hydraulics; four times the designed maximum water usage rate for a 15 hour straight event caused the higher elevation reservoirs not being able to replenish themselves. NO amount of additional water deliveries would have changed this. Only a costly, massive upsizing (replacement) of ALL water transmission, trunk and distribution water mains would lead to an improvement of the fill rates.
Perhaps the Orangeman will bring back infrastructure week!
The existing water main sizing/capacity is the issue, not the availability of water.
Sir Pete, if you were a designer of a city water system, you would take into account worst case scenarios. Your argument is worthless and nonsensical. I can tell you have no design experience as I have, so you are forgiven for not how most of the world works. There were flaws in the system that are inexcusable to allow what happened in LA ... period.
Water could have been pumped out of the ocean, yes?
If you use equipment designed for handling saltwater corrosion; definitely. If considerations were thought out prior to this emergency, saltwater usage could have been mechanized to fill containers not adapted for long-term saltwater usage. Afterall, fresh water could wash out saltwater residue. It's all in the pre-planning which should be done under extreme conditions. You make a good point and it's valid. But obviously, nobody gave the saltwater usage concept much of a thought which appears as a major oversight considering the mess LA is into with rebuilding with no insurance.
I did hear the argument that if saltwater soaked land then nothing would grow there in the future, but seems like if it could stop the fire from completely leveling the buildings that would be something that could be dealt with.
I'm dreading driving the PCH and seeing the little beachfront houses all gone.
"Water water everywhere, and not a drop to drink."
I read the same comment and can only conclude it's a leftist comment thinking more about plants than $5M homes that people don't have replacement insurance. After all, the scooper aircraft from Canada are dumping ocean water, so the "salt water" argument is BS. Our country has people that can come up with "salt water" solutions. Right now, a vegetation reduction actually sounds good! If you have a home next to the ocean and have a water pump to pump ocean water to save your home, sure as heck you'll use the ocean water.
When I once lived in a fire area, I considered adding a large polyurethane tank to hold water with pump and fire department size hosing. Simply watering down the area surrounding your home can help. And beating the fire department to the punch to put out a fire doesn't hurt.
The “worst case scenarios” that you posit are flawed. These LA county & city municipal water systems were designed many decades ago. Since that time, major development and population increases render the water mains as grossly undersized. This is why new infrastructure capital improvements to water main sizing are a normal practice. All a civil engineer needs to do is run hydraulic calculations that meet current and reasonable future demand, hopefully taking into account climate change.
Peter, you are lost in a world of make believe. Get a degree in engineering and then answer these questions and you will not use the term "climate change."
The "Feds" already took over California in 1846. Unchecked population growth since then have created the problems we are facing today. Water shortage? How about building desalination plants? Or getting rid of grass lawns and golf courses? Getting rid of grass lawns would also rid California of the noise and air pollution of gas-powered lawn mowers and leaf-blowers - a definite win-win!
How about getting rid of all the power-minded Dems controlling the water usage.
How about everyone living in California getting a copy of their birth certificate and looking for the block that indicates "place of birth" AND THEN GOING THERE. That would solve most of California's problems. If you don't like it here, go back where you came from and then try to make it HALF as nice as California.
Mic Drop!!!!