Author Topic: Nature's magesty (Read 472 times)

miko2d · « **on:** October 30, 2003, 12:51:24 PM »

I had to make a search of those values in order to enlighten some people as to the realities of our universe. So I might as well post them here.

Let's estimate conservatively that a forest contains 80 tonns of carbon per acre.
Let's assume - conservatively - that energy released when a ton of carbon burns in athmospheric oxygen is five times greater than energy released during the detonation of one ton of TNT.

So you have 400 Tonns of TNT per acre, 4 kiloTonns per 10 acres, 40 kiloTonns per 100 acres - and 100 acres is not that much and can burn pretty fast if you ask experienced people.
Hundreds if not thousands of acres probably burn every second in those fires.

Imagine several Hiroshima-sized bombs going off every second over the So Cal. Makes one appreciate the task facing the firefighters there.

Maybe the government should think of spending a billion or two to prevent reoccurence of such devastation on its lands by creating and maintaining fire-breaks. Or better yet, sell it to the private owners and let them and their insurance companies provide safety.

A fire equivalent to a few hundred nukes does not really cause as much damage as a nuke dropped on a city - but on the other hand a match needed to lit such a fire is much less expensive than a nuke and a missle to carry it.

miko

ra · « **Reply #1 on:** October 30, 2003, 02:23:37 PM »

Quote

Hundreds if not thousands of acres probably burn every second in those fires.

1000 acres/sec = 86,400,000 acres/day. By now the Pacific Ocean would have caught fire.

The way to prevent these wildfires is to have controlled burns from time to time. Kullyfornya must have been slacking off for a while for this much fuel to build up.

ra

Sixpence · « **Reply #2 on:** October 30, 2003, 02:30:22 PM »

I believe they have tried fire-breaks, but the santa-anna winds can carry embers for miles. If you want perfect conditions for a fire, that is it. As the wind flows down from the east, it compresses and the moisture is wrung out. A nice strong dry wind, just what a fire needs to feed it.(along with trees)

We loath the fires, but it is natures way of recycling the land. From every devistating fire comes a new, more fertile forest. You can consider it the destruction of a forest, or the birth of a new one.

midnight Target · « **Reply #3 on:** October 30, 2003, 02:30:57 PM »

There are fire breaks Miko. In fact there were 8 lane freeways that this fire jumped.

miko2d · « **Reply #4 on:** October 30, 2003, 02:51:54 PM »

midnight Target: There are fire breaks Miko. In fact there were 8 lane freeways that this fire jumped.

I know. The main reason is the lack of minor roads, ban on regular clearing and selective logging that allowed all that wood to accumulate and made access to it difficult.
It was an intentinal policy influenced by irrational environmentalists who were opposed to any logging or making forests more accessible.
Also misguided firefighting in the past that extinguished small fires and allowed the brush to accumulate for the big one.
That also promoted growth of fire-prone kinds of pine and in greater densities than was natural for those forests.

Grown trees are supposed to survive forest fires - provided underbrush is not allowed to accumulate. the natural fires were not devastating.

miko

Sixpence · « **Reply #5 on:** October 30, 2003, 02:59:41 PM »

http://nimbo.wrh.noaa.gov/Sandiego/snawind.html

Dune · « **Reply #6 on:** October 30, 2003, 03:09:52 PM »

Another factor is the bark beetle. Even here in Arizona, the bark beetle has caused the deaths of millions of trees. Where there used to be forests of pines are now dried out sticks.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/resources/health/beetle/index.shtml

Story how the beetle increases wildfire dangers:
http://www.azcentral.com/specials/special38/articles/0612barkbeetle12.html

The drought has caused these trees to be so dry they cannot produce sufficient sap to prevent these beetles from boring in so deep the tree dies. These dead trees are perfect tinder for a fire of this type. While most of the losses have occured in Arizona and New Mexico, southern Cali has seen its share of losses. Particularly in the mountain areas near San Diego.

I imagine that next year Arizona may well see a fire season worse than the ones we've had the last two years. And in 2002, Arizona lost almost 600,000 acres to forest fires. Particularly if the drought continues.

http://www.azcentral.com/specials/wildfires/

Dune · « **Reply #7 on:** October 30, 2003, 03:13:32 PM »

PS:

An interesting, if chilling, article from CBS news from June talks how the combination of drought and the bark beetle have left 400,000 acres of dead, dry trees in southern California just ripe for wildfires:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/18/eveningnews/main559297.shtml

Sundiver · « **Reply #8 on:** October 30, 2003, 03:41:51 PM »

Estimated burn rate I saw on the Forestry service site was 7,000 acres/hour that was..a coupla days ago? May be more may be less now.

midnight Target · « **Reply #9 on:** October 30, 2003, 03:41:57 PM »

Quote

I know. The main reason is the lack of minor roads, ban on regular clearing and selective logging that allowed all that wood to accumulate and made access to it difficult.

Wrong again. The bark beetle infestation has been an industry in our mountains for the past few years. I knew many people who worked in the mountains clearing the dead trees. This was an arsonist who knew that the environmental conditions were just right. Sorry you can't blame it on big government this time.

Eagler · « **Reply #10 on:** October 30, 2003, 03:47:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
Sorry you can't blame it on big government this time.

sure you can

lower taxes = less taxes = fewer firemen

I'm surprised the "terrorist" haven't stumbled across something so easy to tie up our resources - can you imagine if you really wanted to start major fires how easy it would be?? all across the country ....

Thrawn · « **Reply #11 on:** October 30, 2003, 03:53:26 PM »

It's global warming.

rpm · « **Reply #12 on:** October 30, 2003, 04:41:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
I'm surprised the "terrorist" haven't stumbled across something so easy to tie up our resources - can you imagine if you really wanted to start major fires how easy it would be?? all across the country ....

The Japanese thought of it in WWII. The FUGO .

Pongo · « **Reply #13 on:** October 30, 2003, 04:48:11 PM »

The total absence of noral wild fires is what gets the hills in that condition. If they allowed normal controled burns every once in a while they could stop this kind of total catacsm.