L.A. fires are the worst-case scenario experts foresaw and feared
Category: News & Politics
Via: perrie-halpern • 6 days ago • 48 commentsBy: Evan Bush, Lewis Kamb and Adiel Kaplan
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Summary
- The Los Angeles-area fires are a worst-case scenario caused by powerful winds that struck after months without rain.
- Fire experts, past reports and risk assessments had all anticipated a wildfire catastrophe to some degree.
- The affected region's geography and weather, paired with climate change and suburban sprawl in fire-prone areas, created a vulnerable situation.
For the Los Angeles area, the recent string of wildfires represents a worst-case scenario — unusually powerful and prolonged Santa Ana winds struck after months without significant rain. But the steep consequences of the blazes are not a surprise, according to an NBC News review of after-action reports following previous fires, wildfire risk maps, public meetings about wildfire risk and interviews with fire experts.
"Entirely foreseeable," said Char Miller, a professor of environmental analysis and history at Pomona College.
The fires have forced nearly 180,000 people to evacuate, cut power to nearly half a million customers and burned thousands of homes.
"We have been building homes deep into the fire zones. We know they're fire zones, we know they're dangerous, and yet City Hall and county government has constantly greenlit development in places of greater and greater risks," Miller said. "All of the factors you don't want to see combined combined."
The risk of wildfire to homes in Los Angeles County is higher than in 99% of counties in the United States, according to a federal analysis. Pacific Palisades, the Hollywood Hills and Altadena, three areas where blazes are burning, have "very high fire hazard severity," according to mapping from the the Los Angeles Fire Department and the state.
"It was not if, it was when" said Joe Scott, the chief fire scientist at Pyrologix, a wildfire risk consultancy that worked on the federal analysis. "But this is at the high end of what could have happened."
After the Woolsey Fire in November 2018, an after-action review described problems that resemble those firefighters face today.
That blaze raced across the Santa Monica Mountains toward homes on the Malibu coast, casting embers up to a mile from its front line and forcing 250,000 people to evacuate. More than 1,000 homes in Ventura and Los Angeles counties were destroyed.
The report described it as a "perfect storm."
The fire's speed and intensity "overwhelmed the resources on the scene," it said, noting that dead-end canyon roads made for challenging evacuations and firefighting access. Given the weather and the fire department's limitations, the review said, the initial response in Malibu and along Pacific Coast Highway had to focus on preserving lives and providing safety — not protecting property. But the public and policymakers did not fully grasp that reality, it said.
"The public has a perception that public agencies can always protect them. As an incident the size of the Woolsey Fire shows, this is not always possible," the report said, lauding first responders for limiting the number of deaths to three.
Even adding more fire engines and taking steps to better prepare homes for potential fires, it concluded, may not be enough to protect new developments in fire-prone areas.
"Even if the current fire weather cycle stops, it will return," it said.
The predictions were borne out this week: Los Angeles County Fire Chief Anthony Marrone said Wednesday that there simply were not enough firefighters to handle the situation, given the weather conditions.
Firefighters battle the Palisades Fire on Tuesday. Ethan Swope / AP
"L.A. County and all 29 fire departments in our county are not prepared for this type of widespread disaster. There are not enough firefighters in L.A. County to address four separate fires of this magnitude," Marrone said, noting that firefighters had been pre-positioned in the Santa Monica Mountains ahead of the blazes. "This is not a normal red flag alert."
Part of the difficulty of fighting fires in the areas affected by the Woolsey Fire and the current blazes has to do with geography.
Pacific Palisades is a meeting point between suburbs and wildland hillsides often battered by winds. High-end homes — median values in the ZIP code were over $3.4 million last year, according to data provided by Zillow — are nestled into an ecosystem with fire-prone chaparral plants like manzanita, scrub oak and chamise, which is sometimes called greasewood.
Before European settlement, those ecosystems could be expected to burn once every 30 to 130 years. Today, blazes are expected in populated areas every 20 years or less because of ignitions caused by human activity, according to the California Wildfire & Forest Resilience Task Force.
Chaparral ecosystems are known for intense, wind-whipped fires, said Robert Gray, a Canadian wildfire ecologist and former wildland firefighter.
"There's just a long list of these chaparral-driven fires, causing immense damage to built-up areas," Gray said, adding that the plants contain volatile chemicals that can increase the height of flames.
In Los Angeles County, sprawl in the foothills now means that "when a fire roars through, as it does, it is leaping from one roof to another," Miller said.
At the city, county and state levels, California has invested in programs to decrease fire risk and devoted more resources and staffing to fight fires year-round. The Legislature in July extended the peak firefighting staffing season from five to nine months.
The city and county of Los Angeles have implemented brush removal programs designed to ensure homeowners have "defensible space" for firefighting. Because Pacific Palisades and the Hollywood Hills are in areas considered "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones," homeowners are required to clear brush, trim trees and maintain clean roofs. State code also requires an inspection before a house can be sold.
Those interventions and others, like installing fire-resistant roofs, can work, Gray said — if everyone in the neighborhood is committed.
"If your neighbor doesn't do it and your neighbor's house catches on fire, the radiant heat alone will negate it," he said.
Insurers have become increasingly leery given the high risk. In March, State Farm did not renew coverage for about 30,000 property insurance policyholders in California, including more than 1,600 in Pacific Palisades. As of September, more than 1,400 homeowners in Pacific Palisades had policies from California's FAIR plan, an insurer of last resort.
To that already vulnerable situation, add exceptionally dry conditions — Los Angeles had not had significant rain since July — and a dangerous windstorm. That is the cocktail behind this week's fires, a confluence of dangers that fire officials had voiced fears about for months.
"Right now, Southern California — especially that coastal part — has not received much rain, so it was very vulnerable with those low humidities and fast winds to be receptive to a wildfire," Anale Burlew, chief deputy of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire), said at a meeting of California's wildfire task force after the Franklin Fire scorched more than 4,000 acres near Malibu last month.
Abandoned vehicles, some burned, along Sunset Boulevard on Wednesday after their occupants got stuck in traffic while evacuating from the Palisades Fire.Apu Gomes / Getty Images
Wade Crowfoot, California's natural resources secretary, said at the meeting that the state's "fire season has turned into the fire year."
"We now face wildfire conditions across the state that really never relent through 12 months," he said.
Winter wildfires in California are often driven by the Santa Ana winds, which sweep down mountain slopes and draw moisture out of coastal areas. The winds can rapidly push any fires that start, particularly when the landscape is dry.
Typically, the San Gabriel Mountains trap high pressure, so the Santa Ana winds are produced as the pressure leaks through canyons and passes. But on Tuesday, the Santa Anas were able to surmount the mountains and send a downslope windstorm toward Pacific Palisades and Pasadena.
"These are areas that are usually better protected," said Robert Fovell, a professor of atmospheric and environmental sciences at the University of Albany.
He added that forecasters accurately predicted the wind event: "It would be fair to characterize this as well-anticipated from a meteorological standpoint."
Once the Santa Ana winds reach high speeds, options to protect property are limited, said Miller, the Pomona College professor.
"When that happens and a fire is ignited, there is no stopping it," he said. "When it's being driven by winds 40, 50, 60, 70 miles an hour, there's almost nothing that a firefighter can do."
Research does not suggest that Santa Ana wind events are becoming likelier because of climate change. But rising temperatures and longer droughts mean a higher likelihood of conditions ripe for fire when the winds strike, according to Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at UCLA.
"Climate change is increasing the overlap between extremely dry vegetation conditions later in the season and the occurrence of these wind events," he said in a recent YouTube address.
Swain was the lead author of a study published Wednesday in the journal Nature Reviews, which suggests that "hydroclimate whiplash" — a term for quick swings between intensely wet and dry weather — has accelerated around the globe. California offers a prime example, since it experienced major flooding during the past two winters.
"This whiplash sequence in California has increased fire risk twofold," Swain said in a news release. "First, by greatly increasing the growth of flammable grass and brush in the months leading up to fire season, and then by drying it out to exceptionally high levels with the extreme dryness and warmth that followed."
Tags
Who is online
49 visitors
As the state legislature calls a special session to bitch about trump…
What would you suggest the state legislature do instead? Pass a law to make it rain? Outlaw wind? Or maybe you’re advocating for really big government now and you want the state to tell people they can’t live on a hill.
Um... Maybe deal with the crisis in Los Angeles? Maybe?
I'm sure protecting violent illegal aliens from deportation will solve all of California's problems though.
Please, give us the details. I want to hear all about the special session called this week, what they did to Trump, and then I want to hear all the details about what the legislature should have been doing over the last three days to fight these fires. I’ll take good notes.
WHATEVER the state legislature is doing this week is irrelevant to the fires.
We can notice that none of these extremist MAGAs have wished Los Angeles well, they have spent all their time and effort attacking the lesbian fire chief and the governor. I dont know if you have seen much of the social media, but some of it is disgustingly antagonistic. For example the far right instigator Charlie Kirk asked his audience "Which one would you rather have , a lesbian fire chief or water?"
Of course it is. But the “country is going to Hell in a handbasket” crowd is only interesting in angrily judging people they don’t like. Facts don’t matter - in fact, they get in the way.
Yeah, I’ve seen and heard some of the highly toxic far right bullshit. Adam Corolla has been particularly disgusting. I also heard Hannity straight up lying about the situation. No empathy. No logic, even. Just dishonest attempts to spike the football on Californians, as if we somehow deserve to have our homes burn down.
Not an easy question for those that can't define a woman.
Playing stupid is a strategy. Not a good one, but it's a strategy. Good luck with the argument that "there's nothing for a state government to do in the face of a massive disaster."
what would you expect the state legislature to do during an ongoing natural disaster? i dont think i've ever head of such a thing.
If california were a red state we wouldnt be hearing a peep from these people.
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, for starters work on making sure the recovery and rebuild happens as quickly and expeditiously as possible? Do you think the state government might have role in that?
But I get it. Protecting criminal illegal aliens is really important and necessitates lawmakers attention in a special session. A massive natural disaster that leaves thousands of people homeless can wait. Probably after reparations too.
Probably not.
But if Texas were a blue state we wouldn't have heard a peep about the electric grid failing in 2021.
Let's don't pretend either side is pious.
I appreciate your good wishes, but I didn’t make that argument.
You started this thread by suggesting that the California legislature is in special session to do something against Trump “as” this crisis is happening this week. But you haven’t been willing to support anything you said in that comment.
California has struggled for years with electrical power - especially when it’s hot and everybody cranks on the a/c - but also as the starter of several fires. It has frequently been the subject of media coverage, debate, and legislative controversy. So, I think there are plenty of peeps to be heard.
What you may not typically hear is criticism of government in places that are victimized by tornadoes, hurricanes, or snow storms. There’s probably some of that somewhere, from time to time - I remember talk of the levees after Hurricane Katrina - but I know that for myself, it hasn’t occurred to me to attack conservative governance as being to blame for tornado or hurricane damage in the moment, as it was happening. The concern for politics over human suffering in this moment has been disgusting, in my opinion.
What happened in California this week wasn’t just a fire. It was also a record-breaking wind storm of a type we don’t normally get. You may hear about the Santa Ana winds, but technically, this was something a little bit different, and in my experience, unprecedented. This event brought winds more out of the north than the usual northeast, and the winds were amplified by a cut-off low pressure system to the southwest.
So, even without the fires, there would have been extensive wind damage - trees knocked down, power outages, trucks overturned, etc. And those things happened! They’ve just been overshadowed by the fires, which were fueled and driven by that wind (not to mention probably being started by the power lines).
We are in complete agreement here.
Wildfires are not political events. Neither are blizzards, hurricanes, floods, tornados or earthquakes.
I've seen some of the footage. It looks horrific. Stay safe.
Thank you. I very much appreciate that.
No worries, in 10 days I will be sure to berate you as to why Trump hasn't prevented or mitigated natural disasters.
Foresaw and weren't prepared for more like it.
Please, expert firefighter. Tell us how we should have prepared.
Are you satisfied with what they did to prepare?
Snarky commentary and bullshit aside, are not fires an annual occurrence in southern California? Wouldn't you rather be over prepared and not need it than to be under prepared and need it? That's how. Plan for the absolute worst and be relieved that you didn't need it?
Prior to that, how about listening to recommendations instead of be arrogant and stating "we have this under control" until you don't and need daddy US to bail you out?
Are you?
Answering a question with a question?
How sad of a deflection.
They are. 100 mph winds are not. This appears to have been the strongest winded event in the region’s history.
What would that look like? How would it function in this specific setting? I hear a lot of emotional criticism, but no details about what specifically should have and could have been done differently that would have made a significant difference.
You haven’t offered any.
Who said that? I didn’t. What re you talking about?
The US is bailing us out?
Deflection from what? Did you contribute something to this conversation? Or was it just your usual?
From answering a question. And you continue to deflect.
Guess you got a problem, then. Sucks for you.
Not at all. I said what I wanted to say and you deflected because you have nothing.
Mission accomplished
Or they didn't prepare correctly and things need to be changed. Of course they will all say there was a plan in place and the real issue is climate change. That way they don't have to actually do anything g about it except blame it on something else.
For example?
Are you going to claim there wasn’t?
For example?
Have people in place that could do a better job
Are you going to claim the plan in place worked?
Sort of what you seem to be doing
What people?
People that could have done s better job, or is it your contention everything was done correctly and the best that could be done?
You’re just repeating yourself. Name these people, if they exist.
And while you’re at it, tell us what - specifically - the people we have did wrong, and what they should have done instead.
[deleted][✘]
I haven’t said either one of those things. You said we should have better people in place but for some reason, you have failed to identify them. You also fail to give any details about what was done incorrectly or what should have been done instead. You keep making the claims, but you repeatedly fail to support those claims.
[deleted][✘]
You keep repeating yourself. I have offered no conjecture. You made the claims. Support them. It’s not up to me to prove you wrong. It’s up to you to support your own claims.
[deleted][✘]
I wonder if some of the celebrities and rich whose homes were destroyed by this might be rethinking their positions
On what? What positions do you think they hold that would change because of this? I doubt they are deniers of climate change. Would reversing their support for women's choice change this? Would abandoning their support for lgbtq Americans change this? Would their support for comprehensive immigration reform have prevented these fires?
It seems pretty funny to me how when the Carolinas and other States with lots of conservatives get hit with crazy storms and people die and whole towns are destroyed the rightwing conservatives are screaming and yelling about Democrats and the current administration being too slow to help those in need, but as soon as something happens to a liberal bastion like CA and especially LA all you hear are smug pieces of shit complaining about liberals political positions as if that somehow should explain why there are extreme fire conditions that threaten homes, lives and businesses.
Only those with less than half a brain would try and reduce this to a "You liberals could have prevented this like super easy and shit but you didn't and so it's all on you! All you needed to do was rake your forests like we do back here in Appalachia!".
They might think the high taxes on their mansions would have served them better being spent on being more prepared
FYI, James Woods the very conservative actor has praised the LAFD, LAPD and the volunteers for doing a great job.
As a side note there are 4 or 5 people on NT that live in SC, they have been through wild firest before but there has been nothing like this in the history of LA, the rest commenting is nothing but speculation and bad info.
FYI Many progressives, including on this site, have openly admitted celebrating his house being destroyed.
gee, looks like maga had better get used to that ...
These fires probably have done more environmental and climate change damage than the results of the money California spent to reduce it
From what I gather, extraordinary winds, hurricane force at times, were the reason things have been so devastating this time. Lawrence O'Donnell, who apparently has a house out there near one of the fires, likened it last night to a hurricane blowing flaming embers instead of rain. That explains how houses like those on the seafront in Malibu that were between a wide road and the ocean with no adjacent vegetation (from what I could see in the images) all burned. The wind was like a long range, hurricane force flamethrower.
I imagine there's not a lot firefighters can do in a situation like that.