61–70 of 215 posts
Excuse my ignorance, can anyone explain to me what makes it so difficult to extinguish the fire? (This question is not meant to be an ass) I tried to google it, but couldn't find a proper answer. I'm just really curious.
Excuse my ignorance, can anyone explain to me what makes it so difficult to extinguish the fire? (This question is not meant to be an ass) I tried to google it, but couldn't find a proper answer. I'm just really curious.
Edit: 180km perimeter
I think the article says that one of the fires has burnt an area the size of the state of Rhode Island.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/11838160-3x2-460x307.jpg
Excuse my ignorance, can anyone explain to me what makes it so difficult to extinguish the fire? (This question is not meant to be an ass) I tried to google it, but couldn't find a proper answer. I'm just really curious.
* the number of active fires is high.
* we have no proper rain and the ground is like DEAD dry.
* the amount of resources we have to put them all out is not infinite.
* the transport network does not cover much of those areas.
* the population tends to cluster in or at the fringes of flammable regions.
* the weather and fuel load are combining into truly horrific, chaotic fire behaviour, that can create their own weather systems (fire storms).
It's a good question though! I wonder if we can invent some technology to solve this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you expect them to actually do? The entire CO2 output of Australia could drop to zero with negligible effect on climate change.
Australia did not fight with the Allies against the Axis powers in WWII because our contribution would make a difference either way. We fought because it was the right thing to do. And in the cause of this global emergency we chose to contribute our fair share and to back our principled beliefs with principled actions.
Excuse my ignorance, can anyone explain to me what makes it so difficult to extinguish the fire? (This question is not meant to be an ass) I tried to google it, but couldn't find a proper answer. I'm just really curious.
They say the only thing that can help now is rainfall. And it's not gonna come. All that the fire fighters can do now is saving lifes, helping people to evacuate, trying to keep important roads safe, etc.
As a long term Australian, this is categorically the worst fire season Australia has experienced. Summer in Australia always comes with one or two big fires in at-risk rural areas over the months from December to February. Queensland and New South Wales were burning heavily by early December. And now Victoria and South Australia have joined in as well and we're still only just into the second month of three. It's unp…
It's not as if climate change would be reverted or even stop if we stopped burning fossil fuel now. There is a lag on the effect, and the situation would still be getting worse for a century or so.
The comparison is between all the extra future damage of burning even more than we already have vs the economic gains today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. Anthony Albanese (opposition leader for Labor here in Aus) said exactly this today on ABC. Whilst there is negligible correlation between the fires and our action (or inaction) to climate change as a country, the rhetoric of “well, we output so little compared of other developed nations” should not apply. Oh, and our elected Prime Minister brought a lump of coal into parliament, which says as much.
Also important to recognize that Australia's carbon contribution is not solely limited to domestic output but also our coal industry. Australia is the largest exporter of coal in the world and this is not properly accounted for in our emissions accounting. On a per-person basis, our output is among the highest in the world and the inaction of others does not absolve us from having a moral responsibility to clean up o…
All that matters is countries having fair targets, and meeting those targets.
Countries are free to meet their emissions reductions targets how they like, including buying cheap coal from Australia, planes from US, and cars from Germany.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would expect that intensive large fires will destroy all forests in affected areas... So next season will be 'fine' (= no trees at all).
Not quite, there will be less fuel, but not less trees. The bushland of Australia has had regular fires baked into it's ecosystem, so the plant species all have coping mechanisms to deal with fire. A good example is are the Banksia varieties that rely on a bushfire to germinate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“No good evidence” sounds suspiciously like “no true scotsman.” Alice: “There’s no evidence that humans have contributed to climate change.” Bob: “Well, actually, X, Y, and Z.” Alice: “I don’t accept those. There’s no GOOD evidence...” And here we have a throwaway account using emotional rhetoric like “climate alarmist monster.” This kind of comment is not anywhere close to the standard we have come to demand on HN.…
The big evidence that higher concentrations of CO2 cause global warming was just the graph in Gore's movie. I thoroughly debunked that graph. You have a defense of that graph? Next, we just canNOT take junk evidence as a reason for big, expensive responses. As I explained that would take us back to killing people to pour their blood on a rock to keep the sun moving across the sky. With no good historical evidence, th…
