Greetings OZ..

[El Pinguino]

CFA base, East Gippsland, accomodation for 440 volunteers.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Whatever....

Just stating facts....

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

If it was climate change causing the fires, the north of Australia would be ablaze too. It isn't. End of argument.

Not really. It’s a lot more complicated than that.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by GILow

Not really. It’s a lot more complicated than that.

How so?

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Probably not a lot.... 2,000,000 hectares burnt in 48 hours.... not a lot you can do with a fire like that... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_bushfires

Only stopped by rain.

..........

It is true that once these fires get really going, they can't stopped by man. Likewise in the 67 Hobart fires, only took 5 hours to destroy a shipload buildings/people etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Tasmanian_fires

Although we can never know, I believe if the current technology and assets where available back then, the loss of life and buildings would have been considerably less.

Put another way, if right now we only had 30s and 60s technology/assets, then the current fires would already be way worse in regard to loss of life and buildings.

However we are still learning, the reviews of the 2019 Tassie fires showed there are still valuable lessons to be learnt.

Some things don't change though Last season some visiting pollie wanted to know why there was a fire truck parked in the back of the local station. He was told it was broken and they didn't have the money to fix it. He quickly promised the money would be sorted as soon as the current fires were out and there was time to fix stuff. 12 months on, the same truck is still in the same place and the pollie nowhere to be seen.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

How so?

The degree of change required to allow the tropical north to burn is of such a magnitude that we’d all be dead and gone before that were likely.

However, the change required to tip the delicate balance down south is relatively tiny.

That’s the problem really. We are dealing with a mathematically chaotic model where very small changes in initial conditions have huge consequences. Getting lost in simple measures like hottest days on record misses the point of the numerous small changes that combine to create the current catastrophic conditions.

So we have minor surface temperature changes in oceans causing shifts in pressure fronts which prevent moist air from moving inland. This leads to reduced rainfall over extended periods leading to extremely low surface moisture earlier in the year which, down south, leads to perfect fire conditions.

Chaos theory makes you realise just how little change is needed but sadly it is difficult for many to grasp in our scientifically and mathematically semi-illiterate nation.

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Well Mr B, your first sentence is correct and some of the rest is true HOWEVER:

You can't compared heat and fire related issues across the decades because you are not comparing apples with apples.

Simple question - how many people of the 400 people killed by heat in the late 1800s would have lived if they had access to
1. air conditioning systems most people have now
2. medical treatment now available (ambulance and hospitable)
3. communication links (phones, internet etc) now available

I could go on but you get the picture.

Likewise with fire related issues; how different would fire sizes be if in 1939 they had:

1. monitoring and mapping systems now available
2. the communications systems now available
3. the air support now available

Again I could go on.

Of course there is no way of accurately knowing but it safe to assume we are better off now than then so think how bad the current situation would be if we only had access to pre war technology.

Ah yes, our technology is much better now than that pre-war, but what is missing now is pre-war COMMON SENSE.

There was a case in Queensland where a farmer was prosecuted and heavily fined because he infringed the anti tree clearing legislation by widening his fire breaks. In the age of Greens leaning, inner city electorates Green superstition prevails.

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

Ann, what a bloody great idea
That guarantees that our priceless pollies won't touch it.

On the other thread about the Australian Bushfires, Wotname posted a link to the only existing study of arson in Australia. It shows that setting of bushfires is difficult to identify the starters, and difficult to get convictions for. It is an offence under the Arson heading, rather than being considered treason by attacking the nation through its national forests, at a time when we all need trees for oxygen. Mine is way too simplistic a notion to be really meaningful. I just feel so ANGRY thinking about people setting fires for their own jollies.

Bushfire arson probably is deserving of study as a separate phenomenon from "regular" arson, which may be an effort at avoiding detection of another crime. BUT, locating and convicting the perpetrator can be impossible, so I really don't think the idea is practical.

Here's something to consider, though, and it could give the company good publicity. Eden was expecting a cruise ship tomorrow. Think a cruise ship could take the remaining 3,000 refugees from Malacoota? Think it could take supplies to Eden, and other coastal towns? Would they do it for the publicity value? [I'm not the first person to be thinking this stuff, either.]

The existing drought will definitely limit recovery. This is our new world. Gamayun's right, and it's scary.

Ann

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by GILow

The degree of change required to allow the tropical north to burn is of such a magnitude that we’d all be dead and gone before that were likely.

However, the change required to tip the delicate balance down south is relatively tiny.

That’s the problem really. We are dealing with a mathematically chaotic model where very small changes in initial conditions have huge consequences. Getting lost in simple measures like hottest days on record misses the point of the numerous small changes that combine to create the current catastrophic conditions.

So we have minor surface temperature changes in oceans causing shifts in pressure fronts which prevent moist air from moving inland. This leads to reduced rainfall over extended periods leading to extremely low surface moisture earlier in the year which, down south, leads to perfect fire conditions.

Chaos theory makes you realise just how little change is needed but sadly it is difficult for many to grasp in our scientifically and mathematically semi-illiterate nation.

How does the IOD and SAM fit in with your explanation?

[Mr B]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

Ah yes, our technology is much better now than that pre-war, but what is missing now is pre-war COMMON SENSE.

There was a case in Queensland where a farmer was prosecuted and heavily fined because he infringed the anti tree clearing legislation by widening his fire breaks. In the age of Greens leaning, inner city electorates Green superstition prevails.

My comments were more to do with all the records currently being broken,
Now they claim the thermometres were reading high in the past,

As for Mallacoota,, Driving 30 kays on a windy tree covered road thats burning,
The people would have been safer staying on the beach,
They have a 200 feet wide firebreak, The Beach, Then into the ocean,
Not the best scenario, But it beats driving along a windy road thats on fire,
Do they have cell phone coverage down there,
Most places I travel down that way dont have cell phone coverage, So the people wouldnt know where the fires were any way,

If fires were close to me where I live, I wouldnt even attempt to drive out of here, That would be suicidal,

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

How does the IOD and SAM fit in with your explanation?

Pretty well, though I’d like to hear the opinion of an oceanographer about how the magnitude of each is being influenced by global temperatures and CO2 levels.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

How does the IOD and SAM fit in with your explanation?

Incidentally, this not my explanation. I am not a climate scientist. I am a university trained pure and applied mathematician who listens to peer reviewed climate scientists and interprets their explanations through the filter of my own training. I concede much is lost in the journey

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

Ah yes, our technology is much better now than that pre-war, but what is missing now is pre-war COMMON SENSE.

.......

Sadly true. In the past, decisions were being made by people who lived and understood the country they lived in. Sometime towards the end of last century, decision making was hijacked by inner city latte sippers.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

If it was climate change causing the fires, the north of Australia would be ablaze too. It isn't. End of argument.

I dunno what your definition of the north of Australia is but in far north Queensland west of the range, the top end of NT and the north west of WA burns in the southern winter. The rest of Oz burns in the southern summer.

I do note the subtropical mountain rainforests of SE Qld and northern NSW have burnt for the first time in at least the past 100 years.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I dunno what your definition of the north of Australia is but in far north Queensland west of the range, the top end of NT and the north west of WA burns in the southern winter. The rest of Oz burns in the southern summer.

I do note the subtropical mountain rainforests of SE Qld and northern NSW have burnt for the first time in at least the past 100 years.

Burns, yes. Burns cataclysmically, no.