Australia wildfires

SarcasticDwarf

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2001
9,574
2
76
Linky

Can anyone provide insight into why the wildfires in Australia compared to those in the US? Wildfires in the US tend to rarely kill anyone (and often the firefighters if they do). What makes Australia different? Is it something to do with the decisions made by people, lack of hazard mitigation, or the nature of the vegetation?
 

daishi5

Golden Member
Feb 17, 2005
1,196
0
76
My coworker is from Australia, and he talked about this a few years back during California wildfires. In Australia they cut back all the trees and other stuff around their house, where as in America we keep lots of nice firewood right by our houses. So when they have wildfires most people in Australia just stay in their homes, and it normally works really well. Something about these fires must have made them worse than normal, or made the houses more vulnerable, because according to what he said last year wildfires are fairly common over there.
 

SarcasticDwarf

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2001
9,574
2
76
Originally posted by: daishi5
My coworker is from Australia, and he talked about this a few years back during California wildfires. In Australia they cut back all the trees and other stuff around their house, where as in America we keep lots of nice firewood right by our houses. So when they have wildfires most people in Australia just stay in their homes, and it normally works really well. Something about these fires must have made them worse than normal, or made the houses more vulnerable, because according to what he said last year wildfires are fairly common over there.

That explains some things from the article.

More than 800 homes have burned, said Victoria Premier John Brumby, who expects the "devastating event" to push the death toll higher. He said flames narrowly spared his parents, with fire stopping outside their house in the western part of the state.

 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
6,238
2,474
136
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Linky

Can anyone provide insight into why the wildfires in Australia compared to those in the US? Wildfires in the US tend to rarely kill anyone (and often the firefighters if they do). What makes Australia different? Is it something to do with the decisions made by people, lack of hazard mitigation, or the nature of the vegetation?


In Australia they have a policy called 'stay or go' - The article below explains it better. I am not sure if this is what is at fault in this case. However it seems like a likely culprit.



http://www.latimes.com/news/lo...8aug03,0,1422284.story
 

Atheus

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2005
7,313
2
0
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Linky

Can anyone provide insight into why the wildfires in Australia compared to those in the US? Wildfires in the US tend to rarely kill anyone (and often the firefighters if they do). What makes Australia different? Is it something to do with the decisions made by people, lack of hazard mitigation, or the nature of the vegetation?

This is a once in a century fire - I've not heard about anything like this before so people won't have been ready. I saw on the news some fires were moving at up to 40mph so people could even have been caught in their cars trying to flee.

In Australia and New Zealand (where I grew up) you are taught about bush fires from a very very early age. It's like don't run out in front of cars, don't swim in a rip tide, and don't start a fire in the bush unless yopu're absolutely sure it's safe. The suggestion that these were lit deliberately is shocking to me.
 

SarcasticDwarf

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2001
9,574
2
76
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Linky

Can anyone provide insight into why the wildfires in Australia compared to those in the US? Wildfires in the US tend to rarely kill anyone (and often the firefighters if they do). What makes Australia different? Is it something to do with the decisions made by people, lack of hazard mitigation, or the nature of the vegetation?

This is a once in a century fire - I've not heard about anything like this before so people won't have been ready. I saw on the news some fires were moving at up to 40mph so people could even have been caught in their cars trying to flee.

I hope you mean a once in a millennium fire. A once in a century event is one that should be commonly planned for since the odds are it will happen at least once in a given person's lifetime.

It is an interesting policy and one I had not heard of. It will be interesting to see the reports that come out of this...if the homes were not well enough protected or if there was a particular charactertistic of the fires that caused so many deaths.
 

gingermeggs

Golden Member
Dec 22, 2008
1,157
0
71
"Back in the day" farmers, in Australia, used to clear 1.5km's around the farm houses, people lived in scantly landscaped townships, with no-hobby farms or bushland reclusive cottages. Rural fire services used to burn off a lot more during the winter time- like Queensland still does- not pandering to "greenies".
And the worst thing is, in light of the forecast temperature of 46*C for the areas concerned- they didn't evacuated the areas (involuntary) in the path of those fires using army transports.
Something people need to know is also these forests are eucalyptus/gum trees the source of products like menthol and Turpentine, they burn hotter then any other live tree around, having turn forests into mono-cultures, tree types like australian red cedar (gymnosperm, different to cali red) and others which lift water tables and provide consistent rainfalls have long been cut out for their timber value.
Its always tragic to see the unnecessary loss of human life, I feel for the people that have lost friends and relatives down there. These kind of environmental conditions will become more frequent, not less, so I hope those in "power" realize their failings here.
 

RocksteadyDotNet

Diamond Member
Jul 29, 2008
3,152
1
0
It was 47C (116F) in Victoria when the fires were started. In those kind of conditions the fire spreads at incredible speed.
 

StinkyPinky

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2002
6,956
1,268
126
Apparently the trees in that forest are very combustible as well. Plus it was a strong wind so the fires spread very quickly.
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,137
225
106
Originally posted by: StinkyPinky
Apparently the trees in that forest are very combustible as well. Plus it was a strong wind so the fires spread very quickly.

Ya think? Reason why the tree's were so combustible was from drought and the 120 degree temps probably didn't help much.

Fires are burning on the outskirts of the nation's two largest cities, Sydney and Melbourne. These, coastal(!) cities, in addition to suffering through ongoing droughts, are now recording record temperatures.

Things are so bad that even climatologists are starting to do the unthinkable, mention "extreme weather" and "climate change" in the same sentence in public. We know that scientifically speaking (one gets sick of repeating this) that it is not possible to establish a link between any particular weather event and Climaticide, but anyone with half a brain knows that there is a statistical relationship between the intensity of extreme weather events and global warming. So, my view is that we ought to mention this statistical relationship as often as we can along with the fact, as Dr. Stone points out, that what is happening in Australia (and in China, and in the United States, etc.) fits perfectly with what the climate models predict.

Pretty bad when wooden power poles start to self ignite.
 

0marTheZealot

Golden Member
Apr 5, 2004
1,692
0
0
I'm not sure if Australia does the same thing, but in the US, we suppress wildfires with extreme tenacity. This just leads to greater detritus accumulation and subsequent fires become larger and larger. Nature has evolved to have these fires on a semi-regular basis, suppressing them only makes the problem worse.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I suspect that the older the trees get, the more combustible they become. The same thing we have in Southern California. Add in any fire, very dry conditions, plus high winds and its off to the races. As the fire makes its own wind and shoots live embers very high in the updraft, almost no firebreak is wide enough to stop the march.

And in the aftermath, new less combustible vegetation will establish itself, and the area will be less fire prone for 30 years or so.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,888
2,788
136
Originally posted by: ericlp
so much for global warming. It's all just a big myth.

You're just as bad as the people that say "it's snowing, so much for global warming HAR HAR!!??!"
 

SarcasticDwarf

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2001
9,574
2
76
Originally posted by: between
Interesting first person account by someone who managed to escape the firestorm with his family

Fireman offers bedraggled koala some water

Did not sound like those people had the slightest clue what to do, especially compared to those in the first story. Wood pile against the house? Wtf.
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,137
225
106
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: ericlp
so much for global warming. It's all just a big myth.

You're just as bad as the people that say "it's snowing, so much for global warming HAR HAR!!??!"

I was only stating the obvious.

Har...Har...

 

Atheus

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2005
7,313
2
0
Originally posted by: gingermeggs
Rural fire services used to burn off a lot more during the winter time- like Queensland still does- not pandering to "greenies".

Why on earth would the green movement be in favour of wildfires?
 

Draftee

Member
Feb 13, 2009
68
0
0
Australian bush fires are extremely hard to control due to the evolution of the plants. Eucalyptus trees have leaves containing flammable oil. This is actually designed to promote fire! As eucalypts are specially adapted to survive fires, it is in their interest to kill off those plants which aren't fire tolerant. Eucalypts have thick bark that acts as insulation, and lignotubers which contain bud and food reserves to regenerate after fires.

Australian Wattle, banksia and the grass tree are all able to survive and benefit from fires, some even require very intense heat to germinate. Indeed, the Mountain Ash tree seed needs fire to regenerate.

The specific factors that contributed to this tragedy are, like many disasters, many.

One factor is obviously the weather conditions. That day, Saturday 7th February 2009, was in excess of 46.4ºC (115ºF), with relative humidity at 6% and wind gusts of up to 100km/h (60mph+).
The day before the fires, chief officer of the Fire Authority "If I said our (weather conditions) were 'bloody horrible', I am understating it: I have never seen figures like this".
With those sorts of figures, entire towns didn't stand a chance. Usually, when you see smoke coming, then you have time to activate your plan; fight or flee. Not this time. Embers from the trees have been known to travel over a kilometre in a matter of seconds, giving no one a chance to react. I have seen photos of a plume of smoke well in the distance, yet spot-fires were starting to erupt on front lawn. You cannot outrun a fire in the Australian bush.

Another factor is the fuel load in the bush. 8 tonnes per hectare is considered a fire hazard. The fuel load in those areas are estimated at between 35 and 50 tonnes per hectare. A fourfold increase in fuel leads to a thirteenfold increase in fire heat.

It also sounds like these fires sprang up without warning. There were no warnings on radio by the time these towns were razed to the ground. You can tell by how these people perished. Burnt out cars litter the road, some crashed due to the thick smoke hampering visibility. Some people tried to flee on foot, hopelessly stranded in the street. Many survivors said it sounded like a jet engine roaring towards them.

Another reason why the death toll was higher than it probably should have been was the people there. Many had moved there from the city to be able to afford a home for their family. This meant they had little experience in the dangers of the bush. This relocation of people also meant a denser population in an area with high fuel load, making this extremely difficult to manage.

The town of Marysville

They believe over 300 people died. More than 700 homes were razed, many have not yet been inspected for deceased.