Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 210 posts

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#141

Post by blhack »

danans wrote: post #127
blhack wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's frustrating that such an obvious solution to this problem exists. Logging will create jobs, stimulate the economies of rural towns, help the forest ecology. Imagine this: what if we could create a biomachine that pulls CO2 out of the air and turns into carbon bricks. Now imagine that we not only have this biomachine but we have a use for all of these bricks. People want them really badly. So there is a huge ince…

> Logging will create jobs, stimulate the economies of rural towns, help the forest ecology. The types of plant growth that significantly increase wildfire risk significantly (by providing kindling) are not the big profitable trees, but rather the low growing brush and low diameter trees, for which there isn't much of a market (although Sierra Pacific Co. in CA is trying to turn those in to particle board). Also, the…

One of the ways that the USFS will negotiate with the loggers is essentially to require them to do forest management in the areas that they are logging.

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#142

Post by AnimalMuppet »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #122
refurb wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firestorms are not the meandering fires that have long been a natural part of ecosystems. Are you saying firestorms don’t happen naturally? I don’t know how to interpret your comment.

Global warming is happening, and easily measurable and observed with the naked eye. Obviously large forest fires have occurred before humans doubled atmospheric CO2 levels in the last century. The idea it is either natural or the result of human caused climate change is a false choice. The question is how much climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of them as a contributing factor. They occur natural…

Doubled? No. From Wikipedia:

> Global annual mean CO2 concentration has increased by more than 45% since the start of the Industrial Revolution, from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years up to the mid-18th century[2] to 415 ppm as of May 2019.

I know, it's Wikipedia. If you've got a better source, cite it. Until you do, "doubled" is hyperbole.

If you want to persuade people that anthropogenic climate change is real, easily-disproved overexaggeration isn't the way to do it.

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#143

Post by 01100011 »

footlose_3815 wrote: post #87
umvi wrote: post #86

Let's take a moment and recognize the fear-mongering going on a few days ago where there were articles saying "this time is different because of climate change, this time climate change super fires have caused a national treasure to be destroyed"

Are you saying there's not enough evidence to associate the wack storm that prefaced this with climate change? The Bay area NEVER gets rain for like almost, 8 months of the year. This was a freak event.

It is not uncommon for tropical moisture to reach the coast of CA in late summer/early fall. It has happened a few times since I've lived here. The lightning is more uncommon but also not unheard of.

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#144

Post by nitrogen »

gdubs wrote: post #99

I was elated to read this, and then disappointed at the comments here. It seems to be feeding an argument of “see, fires are natural and these trees are old - Climate Change is a fear-mongering hoax!” Firestorms are not the meandering fires that have long been a natural part of ecosystems. Ladder fires — where fire leaves the forest floor, up to the crowns, creating a wall of fire that can change weather patterns — a…

A year or two ago I read a classic Sci Fi novel set in 1940s Oakland called Earth Abides. The novel featured a global viral pandemic, and a giant pan-Californian fire. There's also this comment linking to a prior fire in 1904: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24268508

California has always been burning, so we need a better reason to believe This Time Is Different than that new migrants have no living memory of when it Wasn't Different.

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#145

Post by hinkley »

matt-attack wrote: post #137
hinkley wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Naturally“ is a mental trap we have walked ourselves into, with John Muir leading the charge. There is not and never has been in recorded history, a “natural” forest in California. They were anthropomorphic, but in a manner the Western eye refused to see. The indigenous peoples were not a bunch of ignorant riffraff living in a forest paradise wrought by God or Nature. They were the forest paradise, and when they wer…

I’m struggling to understand if you’re serious. You’re telling me that the nomadic tribes of the Native Americans, who never built a single city nor developed any appreciable technology somehow tended to the vast millions of acres of California’s forests?

Tending the Wilds answers this.

The nomadic tribes mostly had an exclusive zone from the mountains to the sea, and moved back and forth seasonally, doing maintenance work to guarantee a good harvest of food and crafting materials the following year. Quite a bit of selection of fire resistant food species (eg, Cammas bulbs, which require meadows)

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#146

Post by AnimalMuppet »

pvaldes wrote: post #61
chrisco255 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California has been subject to century long droughts in the not too distant past (about 1000 years ago). "BEGINNING about 1,100 years ago, what is now California baked in two droughts, the first lasting 220 years and the second 140 years. Each was much more intense than the mere six-year dry spells that afflict modern California from time to time, new studies of past climates show. The findings suggest, in fact, that…

> BEGINNING about 1,100 years ago When systematic deforestation and massive logging started?

In North America? Not hardly.

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#147

Post by AnimalMuppet »

pvaldes wrote: post #56
samcheng wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Also, these trees must now survive a hundred years of aggressive fire suppression, which (ironically) allows fuel to build up to dangerous levels. Either way, these trees are a lot safer after surviving a fire.

Again, the forest does not burn each summer. Is the job of arsonists in the majority of the times. This is a criminal problem. Is domestic terrorism Claiming that fuel is increasing and somebody should burn the forest attract lunatics and does not help to have a future with water, or to decrease the levels of CO2 in the air. We desperately require the CO2 stored in plants and in soil and this is not compatible with t…

Well, the thread is about fires in northern California. These particular fires were not at all started by arsonists, but by a lighting storm.

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#148

Post by CameronNemo »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #110
eloff wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is getting hotter, but only parts of it are getting drier. Parts of it are getting wetter. Overall it will get wetter. For each 1C rise in temperature, the air can hold about 7% [1] more water vapor. Warmer air above warmer oceans will pick up more water and dump it over much the same places as it does now, although the prevailing winds and ocean currents changing will also change that up. I think the effec…

Luckily we dont have to just sit idly and watch it, we can redistribute water intelligently rather than just letting it flood rapidly back to the ocean. I'm all for avoiding climate change, but also want us to be real that we dont have to play an entirely passive role in adapting to what might be a new normal

Water does not just flood rapidly back to the ocean on its own. It forms rivers, streams, creeks, flood plains, ponds, and lakes.

Humans have built channels and storm drains as well as laid down substantial amounts of non porous ground cover like pavement and concrete.

If you really care about using freshwater resources, start restoring rivers and side channels.

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#149

Post by Justsignedup »

eloff wrote: post #108
gdubs wrote: post #99

I was elated to read this, and then disappointed at the comments here. It seems to be feeding an argument of “see, fires are natural and these trees are old - Climate Change is a fear-mongering hoax!” Firestorms are not the meandering fires that have long been a natural part of ecosystems. Ladder fires — where fire leaves the forest floor, up to the crowns, creating a wall of fire that can change weather patterns — a…

The world is getting hotter, but only parts of it are getting drier. Parts of it are getting wetter. Overall it will get wetter. For each 1C rise in temperature, the air can hold about 7% [1] more water vapor. Warmer air above warmer oceans will pick up more water and dump it over much the same places as it does now, although the prevailing winds and ocean currents changing will also change that up. I think the effec…

Thats a bad way to look at it.

A better way:

The moisture is being sucked out of some places and falling to others. So one area is becoming barren, and another is being flooded. This means a few things:

- It is harder to farm. Can't farm when it is flooded, can't farm when it is barren

- It is harder to keep fixed cities because the climate changes. Imagine having to move NYC every 10 years. It is far worse when people don't have good infrastructure.

- The displacement of people will make the syrian refugee crisis look pale in comparison to what is coming.

- Entire ecologies being destroyed is gonna be an economic hit we can barely comprehend.

- Extreme weather is another effect. Example being freezing temperatures mid-bloom. Or a hot week mid winter. Crops grow and freeze causing entire crop failures.

And fires are only gonna get worse. The fact that right now this tree survived is great. But will it in 10 years?

Re: 2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's oldest state park

#150

Post by throwaway1777 »

Justsignedup wrote: post #149
eloff wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is getting hotter, but only parts of it are getting drier. Parts of it are getting wetter. Overall it will get wetter. For each 1C rise in temperature, the air can hold about 7% [1] more water vapor. Warmer air above warmer oceans will pick up more water and dump it over much the same places as it does now, although the prevailing winds and ocean currents changing will also change that up. I think the effec…

Thats a bad way to look at it. A better way: The moisture is being sucked out of some places and falling to others. So one area is becoming barren, and another is being flooded. This means a few things: - It is harder to farm. Can't farm when it is flooded, can't farm when it is barren - It is harder to keep fixed cities because the climate changes. Imagine having to move NYC every 10 years. It is far worse when peop…

Overly pessimistic. We have irrigation, dams, and drainage, we’re not totally beholden to the natural rainfall cycle anymore for farming. As far as coastal cities go, we should be investing more in sea walls, but I think technology can help solve these problems too as it has so far in Miami and Venice. If it eventually gets too expensive to maintain that will happen gradually, not like a sudden refugee crisis.
Post reply on HN