Levi loses house to fire

[oldpotatoe]

Not a fan of him but the destruction is horrifying..

http://www.velonews.com/2017/10/news...a-fires_450037

[mcteague]

Just devastating damage all across the region.





Tim

[Tickdoc]

Is it bad that i'm worrying about the bikes?

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Not a fan of him but the destruction is horrifying..

http://www.velonews.com/2017/10/news...a-fires_450037

Being a fan becomes totally meaningless when it comes to this type of thing. It far supersedes our preferences in sporting terms.

[mcteague]

Originally Posted by Tickdoc

Is it bad that i'm worrying about the bikes?

Yes, yes it is.



Tim

[FlashUNC]

Originally Posted by Tickdoc

Is it bad that i'm worrying about the bikes?

I'd be more worried about the 17 dead and the 200+ folks still missing.

But you do you.

[MattTuck]

I'm still surprised there isn't a more widely adopted solution to protecting structures in these situations.

[Lionel]

This is tragic.

I live in Provence where wild fires are a huge issue. We have many every year but the fire fighting seems to be way more effective here than in CA. I read somewhere that they only have 450 people on this Napa, 45 trucks and 6 planes.

As a comparaison a wild fire started near where I live this summer in a much smaller area but nobody died and 2 homes burned (this is extremely rare here). This is for a much smaller fire; they had 9 planes on it right away, over 1000 fire fighters and hundreds of fire trucks.

Maybe it's because it's much more common here but they seem to get serious resources on it right away.

[benb]

I am curious if many houses there get built with fiber cement? It's very oddball here in New England but my house has Hardiboard fiber cement siding. It's super annoying that we have wood trim, the Hardiboard wasn't thought through great on our house.

But when I looked it up the whole point of it is apparently fire protection, it came out of Australia where fires were much more prevalent.

Of course the old asbestos siding probably provided some protection too but had it's own issues.

Not that any of these would necessarily do anything in this raging inferno.

I'd be curious if any of the other building materials common in the southwest like Stucco provide protection over wood/fiberglass siding.

[Tickdoc]

Originally Posted by FlashUNC

I'd be more worried about the 17 dead and the 200+ folks still missing.

But you do you.

I mean with regards to Levi, silly.

Tragic for all, for sure.

Whole house fire suppression ala sprinklers for the house would seem worth the cost if you lived in an area where the native trees need fire to reproduce.

[FriarQuade]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

I'm still surprised there isn't a more widely adopted solution to protecting structures in these situations.

It doesn't take a whole lot to build more fire resistant homes. Remember the guy in Colorado who spent an extra ~10k on building his house and it was still standing after the fire whipped through when every other structure in the hood was a pile of ash?

Originally Posted by Lionel

This is tragic.

I live in Provence where wild fires are a huge issue. We have many every year but the fire fighting seems to be way more effective here than in CA. I read somewhere that they only have 450 people on this Napa, 45 trucks and 6 planes.

As a comparaison a wild fire started near where I live this summer in a much smaller area but nobody died and 2 homes burned (this is extremely rare here). This is for a much smaller fire; they had 9 planes on it right away, over 1000 fire fighters and hundreds of fire trucks.

Maybe it's because it's much more common here but they seem to get serious resources on it right away.

It just takes time to mobilize the equipment to fight the fires. This one popped up really fast right next to town and the high winds caused it to spread extremely quickly. I'm guessing the closest hot shot crew is a few hours away and that's only going to be ~25 people, it takes more time to get the man power to get something like this under control. Something that is nearly impossible with 50mph wind gusts fueling the blaze.

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by FriarQuade

It doesn't take a whole lot to build more fire resistant homes. Remember the guy in Colorado who spent an extra ~10k on building his house and it was still standing after the fire whipped through when every other structure in the hood was a pile of ash?

I don't remember that one in particular, but I do remember a story about a guy who left his lawn sprinklers on as he fled a wildfire, and it saved his house, while the other stuff burned. All charred around him, but he still had a nice lawn.

I am also thinking of things like a fireproof membrane that can be deployed over the house.

[BobO]

Originally Posted by Tickdoc

Whole house fire suppression ala sprinklers for the house would seem worth the cost if you lived in an area where the native trees need fire to reproduce.

They're not. Sprinklers work primarily on the inside of the house and residential systems are usually NFPA 13D which is not intended to save the house. Even if the whole house doesn't go down, the reality is that sprinklered houses get critically damaged by wildfires as well. Sprinklers do serve a purpose in the real world, unfortunately this just isn't it. One of the homes I built near Show Low, AZ., went down in the Rodeo-Chedeski Fire with the fire sprinklers running full tilt.

I build a lot of houses in some very fire prone areas. There are a couple of reliable approaches to making the house fire resistant. The first and biggest item is unventilated attic spaces. Cement board siding and metal roofing is one. Another other is heavy timber or log houses with metal roofing. Creating zones around the house with little fuel is effective. Sadly, however, with fires this intense, even that may not be protection. Once the fire compromises a window or garage door, it's over.

Condolences to those who have lost loved ones, that's truly horrible.

[velofinds]

Originally Posted by Lionel

This is tragic.

I live in Provence where wild fires are a huge issue. We have many every year but the fire fighting seems to be way more effective here than in CA. I read somewhere that they only have 450 people on this Napa, 45 trucks and 6 planes.

As a comparaison a wild fire started near where I live this summer in a much smaller area but nobody died and 2 homes burned (this is extremely rare here). This is for a much smaller fire; they had 9 planes on it right away, over 1000 fire fighters and hundreds of fire trucks.

Maybe it's because it's much more common here but they seem to get serious resources on it right away.

I don't follow California politics carefully, but it's my understanding that their state government has been (and continues to be?) impacted by budget cuts. Naively, I would assume that that is a contributing factor here as well vis-a-vis elsewhere.

[Lionel]

Originally Posted by FriarQuade

It doesn't take a whole lot to build more fire resistant homes. Remember the guy in Colorado who spent an extra ~10k on building his house and it was still standing after the fire whipped through when every other structure in the hood was a pile of ash?



It just takes time to mobilize the equipment to fight the fires. This one popped up really fast right next to town and the high winds caused it to spread extremely quickly. I'm guessing the closest hot shot crew is a few hours away and that's only going to be ~25 people, it takes more time to get the man power to get something like this under control. Something that is nearly impossible with 50mph wind gusts fueling the blaze.

The fire I am referring to here, started less than 2km from a town with 110km/h mistral.