Katoomba Monthly Temp average set to be SMASHED!!! AGAIN!!!

[Chris Parks]

On cultural burning you have to understand the RFS in NSW. it has been a knigdom building political exercise from the Waterfall incident where many firefighter lives were lost (8?) due to the poor equipment in use at the time. A decision was rightly made that the RFS needed a total overhaul in all and every aspect and the government swallowed hard and did it. At the same time certain figures saw the opportunity to expand their political and departmental influence and in some cases that was repeated at a lower level as well. The RFS as a philosophy does not believe that low intensity burning works unless they have changed their mind and more importantly they believe they are always right and no one else can be. For many years they refused to believe that aerial water bombing could work in Australia and opposed its introduction. I am not sure when they changed on that or even if they did but it might have been around the turn of the century fire season we had.

I have not been directly involved for many years so some of the above may have changed. The on ground people who deal with the fire holding the hose are heroes, it is the upper echelons that caused the problems when I was involved and a lot of it was inter service rivalry which is not a good thing. Add the NP&WS to the mix and no one can agree on anything.

[Bushmiller]

are you sure the fire bombers are 747s

The one's I've seen look a lot like the much smaller 737s to me

Ian

Unfortunately, I think you may be right. A quick look on the net indicates that only three 747s have been built and only a single version remains in service so it is probably unlikely that current government would have taken any steps to hire it even if it was available. The 747 requires a 2400m runway to take off.

It seems likely that the aircraft Ken saw was a 737 as NSW apparently owns such a beast. It was probably obscured by smoke so difficult to identify.

NSW buys Boeing 737 large air tanker for firefighting - Australian Aviation (https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/05/nsw-buys-boeing-737-large-air-tanker-for-firefighting/)

If the 737 ability was so dramatic, imagine how effective a 747 would be. More than three times the capacity! For example, from where we are the flying time would be about 20 minutes from Brisbane and probably 15 minutes return assuming priority would be given for take off and landing in Brisbane. I take Brett's point about the turn around times of small aircraft and choppers, but you also have to have water. Remember that country areas are in a drought. There is very little stored water in many regional areas of Australia.

Perhaps we need some more aircraft: Of all types.

Regards
paul

[Bohdan]

The defence forces are so named because their job is to defend us against danger.

I don't see why our air force couldn't operate a fleet of water bombers which would actually defend us against the real dangers that exist today.
They are supposed to have the skills to bomb targets and the extra practice wouldn't hurt.

The military are helping now but it shouldn't have required an 'on leave' PMs action to get their help.

They should be available whenever needed.

[doug3030]

The military are helping now but it shouldn't have required an 'on leave' PMs action to get their help.

They should be available whenever needed.

I cannot say for sure how it is now, but back in the day ...

When I was in the Army all they had to do was ask. State governments, local councils and even individuals could ask for assistance.

Over 30 years ago when I had not yet even risen above the rank of Sergeant, I was on duty one Sunday and a local farmer who lived opposite the base drove in the gate to advise of a grass-fire on his property and asked if we could help him. I got the fire team mobilized and the fire was quickly dealt with.

I recorded the incident in my Duty Log Book,which I presented to the Adjutant on dismounting duty on Monday morning. His only comment was "Well done Sergeant".

Prime minister at the time was Bob Hawke. I doubt that he was ever aware of this action to his dying day.

I authorized it as a duty person without reference to any higher authority at the request of a citizen.

If I had been asked to justify my actions, which I was expecting to have to do but was not, I would have said that the fire may have posed a risk to military assets if it had not been extinguished.

[Bushmiller]

Doug

I went looking for the tab that says "Really, really REALLY like" but as you are aware, there isn't one. So suffice to say that even if common sense is no longer with us, there are still a few people around who remember what it was.

Regards
Paul

[rustynail]

are you sure the fire bombers are 747s

The one's I've seen look a lot like the much smaller 737s to me
Yes, my mistake they were 737. I have thick fingers and often strike the wrong key. Mind you, 747's would be even better but probably require more advanced runway facilities. Size is not critical, so long as we have the numbers. The difference they make to fire fighting is remarkable. On S#*t Saturday I saw six houses in a row saved by one pass. Very impressive.

[rustynail]

So Bilpin now has quite a few "pinked" houses in the district. We refer to the owners as the "Anointed Ones." We also have a pair of pink donkeys who, prior to their anointing, were the best of mates. Now they won't have anything to do with each other. What ever happened to colour me happy?

[RossM]

Yes, my mistake they were 737. I have thick fingers and often strike the wrong key. Mind you, 747's would be even better but probably require more advanced runway facilities. Size is not critical, so long as we have the numbers. The difference they make to fire fighting is remarkable. On S#*t Saturday I saw six houses in a row saved by one pass. Very impressive.

I sadly shake my head when reading the related comments above. While aerial firefighting is a welcome addition to the tactical firefighting methods, its not a panacea, but many are now latching onto this as the silver bullet that will save us. Yes - some property will be saved by tactical use of these very expensive machines. However there are many issues arising from the growing calls for a dramatic increase in spending on this approach. And as far as effectiveness is concerned, the upper limit of intensity for fire suppression for even the biggest of these machines is about 5000kw/m - the recent fires have been burning with an intensity in excess of 150,000 kw/m.

The reality is that there will always be a limit on the budgets available for fire management. The question is how to maximise the effectiveness of the funds available. Buying or leasing more bombers will make for great political mileage and be seen as a win for those providing the funds. However, better use of this money would be a massive increase in proactive fuel load management, and better infrastructure for those with boots on the ground when fighting fires - ability to more rapidly construct mineral earth containment lines, better manage back burns, updated ground equipment and funding for income support for those who are fighting the fires. But this is not sexy and not suited to quick political soundbites. The huge focus on aerial suppression is a distraction.

I'm not saying that there should not be some increase in aerial firefighting capability, particularly given the northern and southern hemisphere fire seasons increasingly overlap and we can not rely on previous machine sharing arrangements; we will need to acquire some additional capability. However the conversation in the media and elsewhere seems to be ignoring many realities in favour of technology as the solution.

See the following for a well articulated discussion. There are many, many more in similar vein from those who have expertise in this area:
Water Bombing and Magic Bullets (https://volunteerfirefighters.org.au/water-bombing-and-magic-bullets)

[FenceFurniture]

Doug, I hope I'm wrong but I have deep suspicions that such a common sense approach may not be allowed today, and that red tape would be everywhere. Something like:
"But that's OUR job"
"Yes but we were already here"
"Doesn't matter, you should have called us"
and so on.

[FenceFurniture]

Re Ross' comment: I think we need to increase just about every aspect of the game, but in particular the preventative side rather than the reactive side.

Let's say these fires are going to cost $5bills, just for argument's sake (it will probably be much more before it's over - did I read $20b off GDP alone?). That money could buy a helluva lot of preventative measures. I wonder how many cultural burns it would cover? (there would need to be a great deal of education done, people hired and resourced etc etc). The big takeaway from that article for me was that White Fella's hazard reduction is just too hot and too blunt hammer approach. CBs are gentle - hell they hardly even had any protective clothing apart from gloves. I'm imagining a national Fire Force with tens of thousands of Black Fellas and other trained people moving around from district to district, doing CBs as required. It wouldn't be long before they would all be hugely experienced in treating all the varieties of country. Combine their millennia of experience with scientific instruments (for say moisture content reading quickly and accurately) and other relevant equipment.

"SmoKo's Fire Force" has a bit of ring to it, doncha think?

No single approach will ever be the universal panacea, but if we can get the prevention game running much better than it is then we don't need to pour anywhere near as much resource into the panicked curative side - something I'm sure the insurance industry would like, just for a start.

[rustynail]

The Mega Fire which started in the Wollemi National Park was from a single lightening strike in a relatively inaccessible area. The responsibility of National Parks and Wildlife it was left to burn its self out. Well it didn't. More than 500,000 hectares so far and still going. In this sort of country only air fighting is going to get the job done. If we can afford to waste millions on fireworks displays we can afford a bit of serious fire protection. Yes it is expensive but so to are peoples lives, homes and businesses. If it wasn't for the aircrews up here on S#*t Saturday there would have been nothing left. There were 2000 Firies on the ground. All they could do was try to install containment lines, which failed time after time. Keep in mind, we are not talking your average BBQ runaway here, we are talking fire, the likes of which has not been experienced in Australia before. Drastic circumstances require drastic measures. If Global Warming and Climate Change are the real deal, we are going to be looking at this situation occurring with monotonous regularity. If we are going to lock up vast tracts of bushland for National Parks we must be prepared to take the responsibility of proper management. National Parks and Wildlife are punching well above their weight, with little positive effect on weeds,vermin or fire reduction.
If we can afford to fly ourselves around the world just for a bit of a holiday why is it that it all becomes too expensive to have some serious fire protection?

[FenceFurniture]

I haven't been able to find out anything of the fate of the Wollemi Pines, but unless they gave it a good dose of retardant, it's hard to see how they would have been spared.

[AlexS]

When I was in the Army all they had to do was ask. State governments, local councils and even individuals could ask for assistance.

Exactly my recollection as a civilian during floods.

[FenceFurniture]

1. If Global Warming and Climate Change are the real deal,
2. we are going to be looking at this situation occurring with monotonous regularity.No doubt about either part of that.

[ian]

I cannot say for sure how it is now, but back in the day ...

When I was in the Army all they had to do was ask. State governments, local councils and even individuals could ask for assistance.

Over 30 years ago when I had not yet even risen above the rank of Sergeant, I was on duty one Sunday and a local farmer who lived opposite the base drove in the gate to advise of a grass-fire on his property and asked if we could help him. I got the fire team mobilized and the fire was quickly dealt with.

I recorded the incident in my Duty Log Book,which I presented to the Adjutant on dismounting duty on Monday morning. His only comment was "Well done Sergeant".

I authorized it as a duty person without reference to any higher authority at the request of a citizen.

If I had been asked to justify my actions, which I was expecting to have to do but was not, I would have said that the fire may have posed a risk to military assets if it had not been extinguished.
Technically what you did is called "aid to the Civil power".
Again technically, an individual can not request that aid -- it has to be some level of the "Civil Power" the local police, council, what ever. But you as the senior duty person can independently mobilise the base fire team to protect the base from the cocky's grass fire.


Great initiative there me son.
So well done.



BTW
Back in '89, 14 Sqn RAE mobilised on their own initiative to aid the Civil Power following the Newcastle Earthquake.



Edit: to add bit about 14 Sqn, RAE.

[ian]

In respect to cultural burning, the big problem is the weather in the Sydney Basin leads on too many days to the city being clothed in very unhealthy smoke.

Outside the Sydney basin it's more a case of why bother.

[Bushmiller]

If we can afford to waste millions on fireworks displays we can afford a bit of serious fire protection.

Ohhh yes! Well said.

I have just returned today from a local gathering to address a town issue and the subject of acute and chronic problems was discussed. In relation to the fires we have an immediate problem (acute) and a long term problem (chronic). Whilst our first priority is to the immediate effects to people and property (in that order) we should not neglect the aftermath. Fire through a tourist resort is the kiss of death, certainly this year and probably next year too. Bush fire is to land mass what an oil spill is to the ocean.

Ultimately we are all affected to some degree as in the aftermath it is like taking a wrecking ball to the economy.

It is not expensive to put in place preventative measures and to have resources available for when they fail. It is expensive not to do this.

Regards
Paul

[FenceFurniture]

In respect to cultural burning, the big problem is the weather in the Sydney Basin leads on too many days to the city being clothed in very unhealthy smoke. Hi Ian, were you here in Nov/Dec? Unbelievable smoke every damn day in Sydney. I suspect they'd trade that for some less smoky days spread around. I don't think CBs have to be done all that often though - every 3-5 years perhaps?? CBs may not necessarily stop fires but they may well reduce the intensity and make them easier to put out or manage.

Somehow we only had two smoky days up here until quite late in the whole event. I just forget now but I don't think we had any but those two days up until about mid-December. This was quite extraordinary given that I could see the smoke billowing out of the Ruined Castle fire - it was all blowing towards Sydney as could be seen down at Echo Point. But even when it wasn't blowing towards the Big Smoke :roll: there were huge clouds of smoke affecting the colour of sunlight, but nothing down on the ground. However, since then (early-mid Dec) it has been smoky to some extent most of the time - but even then it can vary greatly within one day, and I suspect that is our altitude at play.

There have been quite a number of misty days too, looking at it from inside it's actually very difficult to tell if it's smoke, mist, or a Katoomba Special (50/50 of each)


Outside the Sydney basin it's more a case of why bother.Eh? That might need some expanding upon.....

[FenceFurniture]

Fire through a tourist resort is the kiss of death, certainly this year and probably next year too. Bush fire is to land mass what an oil spill is to the ocean.Although it can be counter-intuitive to how we think things work. Aussie bush is the most adapted to recovery from fires (AFAIK). In 1994 98% of the Royal National Park was burnt. The 1995 wildflower season was the most spectacular I've ever seen! I was a very keen photographer of wildflowers in those years and had very good knowledge of the RNP and where to find what. I was very fortunate to live pretty close to the RNP for many years - the Sydney Basin is the 3rd most significant wildflower area in Australia, after the Stirling and Flinders Ranges.

Just as a matter of interest for those who may not know - the RNP was the first declared in Australia (1879) and the second in the world, after Yellowstone in 1872.

[Beardy]

Bushfire is a bit like a war, there are those who’s world is turned upside down and yet makes the world go around for others.
A lot of work and commerce is generated as a result

[FenceFurniture]

I guess so, but we could do without wars too!

[Beardy]

I guess so, but we could do without wars too!

Agree 100%, much better not to have them.
I was in our local Green Shed yesterday and there was no less than 20 pallets of generators and fire pumps lined up, many with their pay and pickup receipt on them. The staff member I was talking to said he was sick of handling them and were selling like hot cakes
I was in the local steel merchant who also do rural fencing supplies as well and they were sending gear out by the semi load, said they were flat out and will have trouble keeping stock up to the demand.
I imagine that would be the case for numerous items. A lot of work will be generated from others misfortunes.

[rustynail]

Some comments made to Firies during S#*t Saturday: "Well, you took your sweetarse time getting here." " Why don't you use your own water?"
"Please leave now, your lights are upsetting my chooks." " Can you go down the bush and save my pergola, my kids were married under that."
"Don't drive that dirty big thing on my lawn." "Why would you want to get a flat tyre now, in the middle of all of this?" "Have you guys seen my cat?" "My dam water is required for my camellias." And the list goes on. Some folks just don't seem to get it.

[ian]

Hi Ian, were you here in Nov/Dec? Unbelievable smoke every damn day in Sydney. I was there for half of October and most of November. Long story ...
Some mornings I'd wake and not be able to see the zoo which is only about 500 m from the flat's balcony.

[Bushmiller]

Some comments made to Firies during S#*t Saturday: "Well, you took your sweetarse time getting hear." " Why don't you use your own water?"
"Please leave now, your lights are upsetting my chooks." " Can you go down the bush and save my pergola, my kids were married under that."
"Don't drive that dirty big thing on my lawn." "Why would you want to get a flat tyre now, in the middle of all of this?" "Have you guys seen my cat?" "My dam water is required for my camellias." And the list goes on. Some folks just don't seem to get it.

That level of misunderstanding and the inability to prioritise is very disturbing.

Just moving on from there to the level of mis-reporting that is encouraged by some elements of the press:
"Deep in the burning forests south of Sydney this week, volunteer firefighters were clearing a track through the woods, hoping to hold back a nearby blaze, when one of them shouted over the crunching of bulldozers.
“Don’t take photos of any trees coming down,” he said. “The greenies will get a hold of it, and it’ll all be over.”
The idea that “greenies” or environmentalists would oppose measures to prevent fires from ravaging homes and lives is simply false. But the comment reflects a narrative that’s been promoted for months by conservative Australian media outlets, especially the influential newspapers and television stations owned by Rupert Murdoch.
And it’s far from the only Murdoch-fueled claim making the rounds. His standard-bearing national newspaper, The Australian, has also repeatedly argued that this year’s fires are no worse than those of the past – not true, scientists say, noting that 12 million acres have burned so far, with 2019 alone scorching more of New South Wales than the previous 15 years combined."

This is particularly disturbing
"And on Wednesday, Murdoch’s News Corp, the largest media company in Australia, was found to be part of another wave of misinformation. An independent study found online bots and trolls exaggerating the role of arson in the fires, at the same time that an article in The Australian making similar assertions became the most popular offering on the newspaper’s website."
The full story is here:

How Rupert Murdoch is influencing Australia’s bushfire debate (https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2020/01/09/rupert-murdoch-bushfire-debate/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Morning%20News%20-%2020200110)

It is no wonder that at a time of confusion and despair we become misinformed as well.

Regards
Paul

[rustynail]

Pleased to announce, we have had a couple of days with light rain. The donkeys have reverted back to their original colour and they are once again on "speaking" terms.

[AlexS]

There was a time when the Murdoch newspapers, The Daily Telegraph and the Australian, were useful, but most people now can afford toilet paper.

[FenceFurniture]

There was apparently one responsible person at Newscorp, but couldn't take their disinformation campaign and left.
News Corp employee lashes climate 'misinformation' in bushfire coverage with blistering email | Media | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jan/10/news-corp-employee-climate-misinformation-bushfire-coverage-email)

[Lappa]

Climate Change is real. It’s been happening since the Earth was first formed.

[Bushmiller]

Climate Change is real. It’s been happening since the Earth was first formed.

Agreed. The challenge is whether we can survive that change.

Regards
Paul

[FenceFurniture]

From Tuesday evening:
It's finally raining properly here right now, but there's also a fair bit of loud and bright lightning.

466691


...and sure enough, there's a new fire in the Blue Mountains, north of Faulconbridge - thought to be started by a lightning strike

[FenceFurniture]

Climate Change is real. It’s been happening since the Earth was first formed.Like Bushmiller, I agree, but that statement seems to indicate that mankind has nothing to do with severely hastening it?

Perhaps it might be clearer if we referred to Man Exacerbated Climate Change or Human Induced Rapid CC.

[woodPixel]

Maybe forcibly putting newspapers into the Fiction and Fantasy sections of the library would represent what they truly are.

No better than a fantasy novel.

Perhaps a change in federal law would see it change - FORCE articles to carry appellations - FACT, FICTION, OPINION and simply ADVERTISEMENT*.... in bold, at the beginning of EVERY article.

The masthead must carry the percentages -

FACT - 6%
FICTION - 40%
OPINION - 40%
ADVERTISEMENT - 14%


People can then be deliberately misinformed... wilful ignorance is not illegal, but the spreading of deliberate misinformation as fact surely should be a crime.


* Anything they were paid for.

[FenceFurniture]

You forgot an "Alternative Facts" category.

[Skew ChiDAMN!!]

Like Bushmiller, I agree, but that statement seems to indicate that mankind has nothing to do with severely hastening it?

Perhaps it might be clearer if we referred to Man Exacerbated Climate Change or Human Induced Rapid CC.

Nar. Just 'Climate Change' will do.

It doesn't matter 'who started it,' what does matter is A: recognising that it is, indeed, a matter of serious concern and B: pulling our fingers out and collectively doing something about it.

Any other response will give us all a life-lesson of Darwinism in action.

I can see mankinds tombstone now: "He saw the train coming but couldn't be bothered moving."

[FenceFurniture]

This is only somewhat anecdotal, and the weather up here has always been subject to some pretty wild swings. It's been known to snow here at least once during December, and certainly I had a fire going all day Xmas & Boxing days in around 2012. Not uncommon in summer to have a hot day followed by a relatively very cold one (say 33° and then 18° the next day).

Today for example was forecast to be 36° and would have been that, preceded by yesterday at 18°. Tomorrow 19° and Sunday 15°(!). Nothing unusual about that (except for the 36°) although 15° is out there. Actually there is something pretty weird about cold - REALLY hot - cold - REALLY cold all within a 4 day stretch.

However, and this is the anecdotal part, what I'm noticing is that these wild fluctuations from one day to the next are becoming more frequent, and with wilder fluctuations.
We might usually have one or two instances in a summer.
We might usually have a small handful of days over 30°.
Just a week ago NYE was the hottest day ever here at 39.8°, which I'm going to call our first 40° day, and two days later it was 19°.
There have been at least two other fluctuations like that in the last 6 weeks:
21st Dec 39.5° (hottest ever day until last Satdy), then 13.7° the next damn day!

7 days in Dec of 33° or more, and 3 more in the first 10 days of Jan - that's pretty much unheard of here.
4 days over 30° in November which was out hottest Nov ever. No extreme swings for the month.

[doug3030]

There was apparently one responsible person at Newscorp, but couldn't take their disinformation campaign and left.
News Corp employee lashes climate 'misinformation' in bushfire coverage with blistering email | Media | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jan/10/news-corp-employee-climate-misinformation-bushfire-coverage-email)

Putting my own personal opinions aside to look at this from a purely logical point of view, there are really two ways to look at this:

1. Newscorp is telling the truth, or

2. Newscorp is running an misinformation campaign.

If Newscorp IS running a misinformation campaign then why? What is the motivation and who stands to profit from it? Why would they be running a misinformation campaign if they or someone associated with them has nothing to gain by it?

[FenceFurniture]

Nar. Just 'Climate Change' will do.

It doesn't matter 'who started it,' what does matter is A: recognising that it is, indeed, a matter of serious concern and B: pulling our fingers out and collectively doing something about it.Yeah, I'd be happy with that but the problem is that it gives deniers the out that they keep using to do as little as possible: "always been going on - nothing to see here."

To be completely blunt, even if this is all naturally occurring ....somehow....we still have to do something to slow it down because vast areas of the planet will not be liveable, which will be costly in the extreme. Far far more costly than knocking out use of two fuels that we are running out of anyway.

[FenceFurniture]

If Newscorp IS running a misinformation campaign then why? What is the motivation and who stands to profit from it? Why would they be running a misinformation campaign if they or someone associated with them has nothing to gain by it?Dunno why, but I'll bet precious things that it's purely for profit. It's probably got a great deal to do with taking the opportunity to feed off the fears of the deniers. Alan Jones is a master of talking crud that people like to believe.

[Bushmiller]

Putting my own personal opinions aside to look at this from a purely logical point of view, there are really two ways to look at this:

1. Newscorp is telling the truth, or

2. Newscorp is running an misinformation campaign.

If Newscorp IS running a misinformation campaign then why? What is the motivation and who stands to profit from it? Why would they be running a misinformation campaign if they or someone associated with them has nothing to gain by it?

Doug

I think that money, greed and self interest are the underlying factors. People with vested interests do not want to see their cash cows run dry. So the coal companies, the oil companies and anybody else who sees their livelihood threatened orchestrates a campaign to protect their interests. This inevitably results in the major players jumping into bed with each other. Why would Murdock, for example, perpetuate a biased report rather than the truth?

Money.

Why is there such an ebullient business in Canberra centred around lobbying? It is to ensure the interests of influential players are represented and where possible swayed. Note I did not mention anything about "best interest." Why, as another example, does Gina Rinehart contribute millions to the Liberal party coffers? Call me cynical if you wish, but I am fairly certain it is on the understanding that the party does nothing that will lend any credence to climate change and adverse effects it may have on the mining of fossil fuels.

Regards
Paul

[tony_A]

If Newscorp IS running a misinformation campaign then why? What is the motivation and who stands to profit from it? Why would they be running a misinformation campaign if they or someone associated with them has nothing to gain by it?


This article by Michael Pascoe gives some possible explanation of Murdoch's reason.

Michael Pascoe: How Murdoch’s myrmidons murdered climate policy How Murdoch’s ink-stained imps killed climate sanity (https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2020/01/02/michael-pascoe-murdoch-climate/)

Tony

[MandJ]

I debated for a long time before positing this, I'll likely regret it.

YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zrejG-WI3U&t=187s)

I'm not interested in character assassinations and rhetoric, what I am interested in is both sides of a correct science based debate, without bias.

I want to hear from all scientists, especially when new findings become available, and not be shouted down by slogans because it goes against some peoples almost religious belief of the proven facts as they know them, IMHO this is an attempt to shut down all other scientific knowledge / debate as more science based knowledge becomes known and published.

We are poisoning our planet in so many way, we have polluted and virtually destroyed our oceans, forests, land, food and health, all forms of pollution have to be tackled and we need to be sure now that the decisions we cast in stone are 100% correct.

I've been looking at all scientific findings for a few years now and the above video brings some of the other data I've read together, it has in the past, and continues to raise some question (for me at least), so I try to keep an open mind. I'm not saying the current information realised by the media is flawed or misleading, but what if it's not 100% correct, is it wrong to take the time to look and listen to all science based data before attacking anyone who dares to ask a question, this seems to be the case, especially with the media gossip columnist programs now disguised as news reporting. On ALL news subjects and reporting.

[FenceFurniture]

YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zrejG-WI3U&t=187s)AT 97 minutes it may be a while before I have the time or the data allowance to look at that (data clicks over on the 19th). Are you able to distil it down into a summary? The comments underneath it seem to indicate it appears to be somewhat in favour of scepticism, but I haven't watched a second of it, so...



... not be shouted down by slogans because it goes against some peoples almost religious belief of the proven facts as they know themThere are certainly some groups that are of no use to anyone, and that includes that ridiculous notion that taking a caravan of protesters up to Cleremont was going to change the minds of locals who want the jobs that would be created by a coal mine. That was completely counter-productive, and IMO was the single biggest factor to SmoKo not losing the election (note I don't say he won it, because he didn't - it was handed to him). There's only one seat in it, and Qld deserted Shorten. I dunno how good or bad he would have been - we had a very similar choice of poor alternatives just like the Brits just had.


We are poisoning our planet in so many way, we have polluted and virtually destroyed our oceans, forests, land, food and health, all forms of pollution have to be tackled and we need to be sure now that the decisions we cast in stone are 100% correct.There can surely be no disagreement anywhere that putting less of our man made crud into the atmosphere can only be a good thing. Would anyone disagree with that?


I'm not saying the current information realised by the media is flawed or misleading, but what if it's not 100% correct, is it wrong to take the time to look and listen to all science based dataI very much doubt that it is ever 100% correct (or not for very long) because it's a developing situation. What was correct yesterday may not be as correct today or next week - not because it was wrong yesterday but because the situation has changed.

It's kinda like fighting a large bushfire - nobody knows where it will end up, but we know it's going to be bad. And therein lies the problem - we're out of time, according to the best science available to us, and the longer we wait, the more expensive and difficult it will be to make any kind of reasonable corrective action viable.




before attacking anyone who dares to ask a questionChallenging is very different to attacking. I don't believe there's been any attacking within this thread from anyone towards another poster. Nothing wrong with asking questions.


It still gets back to this:

466679

and this

...even if this is all naturally occurring ....somehow....we still have to do something to slow it down because vast areas of the planet will not be liveable, which will be costly in the extreme. Far far more costly than knocking out use of two fuels that we are running out of anyway.Think about the ramifications of that. Think of the desert dwellers, just for a start.

[FenceFurniture]

Frankly I don't care whether people are scared or not of electric vehicles coming in with oil going out because it's going to happen whether the CCDs like it or not. Industry has largely made its choice there and the momentum is building fairly rapidly - probably rapidly enough I suspect. For a while - probably a fair while - electric vehicles won't be much use for longer distance offroad work, only because of not being able to recharge (the torque from elec is actually better).

In short I am personally quite satisfied with the progress of electric vehicles, but even quicker would be better. No real point arguing against it either - gunna happen. A HUGE benefit of electric vehicles will be no longer having to worry so much about the Middle East volatility. Once oil is history you can bet the Yanks will out of there like a shot.

The elephant in the room is power generation, and we have discussed that at great length in the other thread a year or so ago. Presumably what Australian CCDs are scared of is the loss of export revenue - but that decision will be made for us by the importers from overseas. We will have little to no control over the directions that other countries take regarding importing our coal.

Coupled with that, it seems to me that we have potentially enough renewable resource capabilities to go more or less coal free more or less fairly soon. Solar take-up is huge (and indeed causing its own set of somewhat temporary problems). Why? Because it's cost effective over a reasonable time, and getting better all the time.

This is where I would like to see massive investment from the Govt - in battery storage. Why? One reason is quite obvious, but we would also be able to export that technology. I don't know if it would replace the coal revenue, but if we don't do it someone else surely will and we'll be left on the shelf again with another missed opportunity.

[doug3030]

In short I am personally quite satisfied with the progress of electric vehicles, but even quicker would be better. No real point arguing against it either - gunna happen. A HUGE benefit of electric vehicles will be no longer having to worry so much about the Middle East volatility. Once oil is history you can bet the Yanks will out of there like a shot.

The elephant in the room is power generation, and we have discussed that at great length in the other thread a year or so ago. Presumably what Australian CCDs are scared of is the loss of export revenue - but that decision will be made for us by the importers from overseas. We will have little to no control over the directions that other countries take regarding importing our coal.

The trouble with electric cars is not the technology of the vehicles themselves. It is in generating and distributing the required electricity to where the vehicles are garaged so that they can be charged up. Also charging stations along highways for interstate trips are a challenge.

There would not be a single suburb in Melbourne where the electricity grid could support even one or two electric cars per STREET, when there are currently an average of 2-4 petrol/diesel cars per HOUSE. The grid cannot currently support all the air conditioners that people turn on in the hot weather resulting in load shedding/local blackouts.

Imagine the chaos when everyone has an electric car and the power goes off over three suburbs overnight and 20,000 cars are flat in the morning.

Not to mention that having all those electric cars before we have 100% renewable electricity in place will only result in burning coal for powering cars instead of petrol/diesel.

Already there are electric car charging stations setup powered by diesel generators.

We have a long way to go before the electric car will be commonplace.

[FenceFurniture]

That's exactly why we need to get battery storage happening quickly. Power sharing or sub-letting also needs to be explored.

I think most of those problems you described there can be overcome. "Teething problems" :D

Given that we know oil is gone in 50 years (yes or yes) and that electric vehicles are the most likely to succeed them, it only adds further weight to getting rid of (most) coal and having our electricity supply much more locally produced. Hydrogen power all sounds wonderful but a recent video I watched indicates that it is unlikely to win the race (cost).

As Joel Fitzgibbon said after the election "Coal WILL be part of the mix until at least 2050, so get used to it."
The point being that we don't have to eradicate coal-fired power - we just have to vastly reduce the crud going into the air, so either vastly reduce (but not necessarily eliminate) c-f power, or capture the nasties before the go up (prolly virtually impossible).

[doug3030]

I think most of those problems you described there can be overcome. "Teething problems" :D

"Teething problems" :D is a bit of an understatement, but I suppose that's what you meant by adding the smilie.

Boosting up the entire national power grid to handle the increase and concurrently removing coal from the mix will make building the NBN look like a walk in the park.

[FenceFurniture]

Boosting up the entire national power grid to handle the increase and concurrently removing coal from the mix will make building the NBN look like a walk in the park.Only coz Fizza dumbed it down - it should have been a much harder build! :D

Yes, that's why I'm suggesting that locally (i.e. rooftop) produced, shared and used power via better batteries will (to my inexpert mind) go a long way to charging our vehicles, and therefore largely keeping the grid out of the equation, or at least as much as possible. I dunno, maybe neighbourhood shared batteries or similar - I just think there are things we could think through. There are plenty of rooftops that are not suitable for panels - like the one here which we deeply suspect as asbestos tiles (which means nobody wants to work on it). We need an Energy Summit in the same style of Hawkey's Economic summit in 83. That was one of the best examples of Leadership I've witnessed

[Simplicity]

Just sticking my uneducated head,in.
Has anybody mentioned tree planting.?
For example ,we have 25 million people living here give or take a few.
If and yes I know it’s a long shot if , the government provided each individual with 4 trees at a cost to the government at say $1 a tree (assuming they get mega bulk discount rate)
We each plant our four trees (100 million trees planted)cost 100 million,
Of course assuming we have that many trees saplings available.
With a survival to maturity rate of say 50/60 percent
Surely ,this will help the dumb humans in more than one way.
An we like trees here in one way or another.
Just a thought.

Cheers Matt.

[FenceFurniture]

Absolutely Matt! We'll have run out of stuff to burn just as they are getting big enough to go off nicely.

Seriously though it's yet another thing we need to do, but carefully - no weed trees should be planted (right tree wrong location etc).

[Simplicity]

Absolutely Matt! We'll have run out of stuff to burn just as they are getting big enough to go off nicely.

Seriously though it's yet another thing we need to do, but carefully - no weed trees should be planted (right tree wrong location etc).

This could be run in with conjunction of a new school class.
Environmental science for kids ????
(Or look after the place you live in!!!)

Cheers Matt

[tony_A]

I debated for a long time before positing this, I'll likely regret it.

YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zrejG-WI3U&t=187s)



I wasn't familiar with the Independent Institute so Googled them. Good old Wikipedia states that they are an American think tank that is against National health care, supports the right to bear Arms and have published various works denying Climate Change. In other words, a Conservative Think Tank.

I also Google Dr Willie Soon and his Wikipedia profile inst blemish free. A well know Climate Change denier who has received major funding from Petroleum and Coal interests and has been accused of failing to disclose material conflict of interest when publishing articles.

I watched part of the video and thought it seemed more like a pep talk to a footy team than serious scientific debate. Checked some of the data he shows and he was not being totally honest with it. Not mentioning a caveat in the original data which had the effect of misrepresenting the picture.
Im sceptical of anyone who calls Al Gore a criminal and favourably quotes Donald Trump.

It didn't change my mind.

[AlexS]

Regarding anthropogenic climate change, the overwhelming evidence, accepted by an overwhelming number of climate scientists who are qualified in their fields, is that it is real, and it is essential that we take urgent action to counteract it.
Of course, new evidence might be found to prove the experts wrong. However, the time is long past when 'deniers' can throw up a random topic and say "But what about...", when, in all probability, their answer has been published and peer-reviewed to within an inch of its life. They can no longer say "It's a conspiracy among the..." without providing any evidence. The burden of proof has now shifted to the deniers.

[FenceFurniture]

The burden of proof has now shifted to the deniers.Hear hear! And also to say what they are afraid of.

[A Duke]

Hi,
An ancient curse "May you live in interesting times"
I think we do.
Regards

[Simplicity]

Hear hear! And also to say what they are afraid of.

There afraid of the truth(an losing a s.... loaf of money)

[Glider]

Regarding anthropogenic climate change, the overwhelming evidence, accepted by an overwhelming number of climate scientists who are qualified in their fields, is that it is real, and it is essential that we take urgent action to counteract it.
Of course, new evidence might be found to prove the experts wrong. However, the time is long past when 'deniers' can throw up a random topic and say "But what about...", when, in all probability, their answer has been published and peer-reviewed to within an inch of its life. They can no longer say "It's a conspiracy among the..." without providing any evidence. The burden of proof has now shifted to the deniers.

It is clear that lots of people still see this as a "debate". However I suspect those who obviously want to reject the science or remain unconvinced will remain so for their own reasons. The problem is that everyone thinks they know something about the weather and they see climate and weather as being synonymous. Shove a Stuve diagram under their noses and discover what they truly know. The vast number know the term "greenhouse gases" but have no idea how the whole system works. If we were discussing a medical breakthrough, astronomy or some other topic about which people freely admit ignorance, there would be no "debate". Climate change science, including formulae which are still valid, provable and in use today, dates back to 1896. It's not a matter for debate or new discoveries, it's fact. No one with any scientific credibility would deny it nor have they presented any evidence to support such a position.

As others have rightly said, this is all about money and the need for significant change, It's cheaper and easier to do nothing. It's notable that he same shock jocks who were a part of the cash for comment scandal are the same team poo-pooing climate change.

Can someone please move the brick wall a little closer to my head?

mick

[FenceFurniture]

It's cheaper and easier to do nothing.It might be cheaper in the VERY short term Mick, but in the longer run it'll be a helluva lot more expensive if we don't start acting with gusto soon.

Can someone please move the brick wall a little closer to my head?Sure :banghead::bricks: Take yer pick.

[Glider]

As others have rightly said, this is all about money and the need for significant change, It's cheaper and easier to do nothing.
mick

This is the full context of what I wrote. I was not advocating doing nothing merely opining on the viewpoint of those who oppose action.

mick

[FenceFurniture]

Yes, that was understood, I'm just saying...

[woodPixel]

This makes one think...

Australian 12-monthly mean temperature anomalies since 1911 (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/history/temperature/)

[woodPixel]

Imagine solar panels on every roof.

Local battery storage. Elevated water storage where feasible for pumped hydro storage.

A trillion Kwh spare for desalination plants... And send it to the farm land.

Fields of wind turbines... Some our to sea.

Recycling of every scrap. Metal, glass, paper, bio....

Biodiesel and methanol distillaries using hemp.

PlyScrapers made with local materials, local fabricaria for DIY and cheap initial housing for all.

Plant vast timber forests. Replenish the rain forests.

It's a dream. I'm in love with it.

[FenceFurniture]

Looks like Solar Paint might be worth reading about too.
solar paint - Google Search (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=solar+paint)

[ian]

Just sticking my uneducated head,in.
Has anybody mentioned tree planting.?
For example ,we have 25 million people living here give or take a few.
If and yes I know it’s a long shot if , the government provided each individual with 4 trees at a cost to the government at say $1 a tree (assuming they get mega bulk discount rate)
We each plant our four trees (100 million trees planted)cost 100 million,
who remembers Bob Hawke's ONE BILLION trees by 2000?


anybody?


100 million trees is but a drop in that ocean.



BTW, the cost to Government would be closer to $10 per tree if everyone were to be given 4 trees. You know, you can't get in the way of private enterprise (AKA the consultant industry) turning a decent profit.
Buying in bulk would more likely cost about 20 cents per tree, it's the consultants that add the rest of the cost.

[rustynail]

Garbage! Total garbage!
There will be a presentation shortly to our illustrious government demonstrating the use of perishable waste to make electricity. A mini plant is currently under construction so the boffins can see it happen first hand.

[Bushmiller]

Imagine solar panels on every roof.

Local battery storage. Elevated water storage where feasible for pumped hydro storage.

A trillion Kwh spare for desalination plants... And send it to the farm land.

Fields of wind turbines... Some our to sea.

Recycling of every scrap. Metal, glass, paper, bio....

Biodiesel and methanol distillaries using hemp.

PlyScrapers made with local materials, local fabricaria for DIY and cheap initial housing for all.

Plant vast timber forests. Replenish the rain forests.

It's a dream. I'm in love with it.

WP

I think that's a lovely selection of thoughts. Can I add an addition? I don't want to grow old!

:wink:

:D

Regards
Paul

[doug3030]

How about an addition of half an inch of rain every night between 2 and 3am and sunshine all day? Plenty of water and minimal inconvenience to anyone

[woodPixel]

Im just wondering. At what level do we humans require the obviousness of a complete and total existential threat to act?

Has it simply become too big? Despite our apparent genius, perhaps we cant "solve" this and this is the end of the road for our species?

Have we created our own extinction level event?

I'm reminded of this comic...

466981

[FenceFurniture]

I watched David Speers interview with Smoko (30 minutes). He's acknowledged the Hawaii mistake, and is going to present a Bushfires Royal Commission possibility to Cabinet.

What mystifies me though is why Journalists (even those as good as Speers) don't insist on windbag politicians answering the question. Smoko went off on big long non-answers - just taking the opportunity to beat his chest. Finally after 3 minutes of this Speers asked him the same question again, and still did not get a definitive answer.

Smoko complained that he had already responded to such-and-such twice before (previous to today) "I've already answered that on two other occasions" but he's quite happy to beat his chest about some minor achievement every day until even he gets sick of it. "So answer it again for those who didn't hear, and we'll see if your answer is the same twice running".

The job of a Journalist is to hold them to account, not give them endless opportunities to pass wind.

I just hope that people remember that he had to be shoved into many of the current small fixes, like the Royal Commission idea (not sure who), compensating Fireys (Albanese), shutting his mouth for a few days (Cobargo residents), getting more aircraft (who??), because he'll claim them all as his own. Bloody disgraceful performance from a so called Leader. Hasn't had a single original idea to fix this, that I know of.

[Beardy]

X
im just wondering. At what level do we humans require the obviousness of a complete and total existential threat to act?

Has it simply become too big? Despite our apparent genius, perhaps we cant "solve" this and this is the end of the road for our species?

Have we created our own extinction level event?

I'm reminded of this comic...

466981

466982



Mod edit

:rulez2:

[ian]

I watched David Speers interview with Smoko (30 minutes). He's acknowledged the Hawaii mistake, and is going to present a Bushfires Royal Commission possibility to Cabinet.
seriously, what benefit will we get from a Royal Commission? and will such a commission need to wait till after the WA, Vic, SA, NSW, Qld and Tas coroners have held their enquiries?

Conclusion 1 -- Climate change is real and we as humans need to something more than look at the problem and go "It's all too hard."
Conclusion 2 -- the current widespread drought greatly exacerbated the severity of the fire season.
Conclusion 3 -- hazard reduction burns had little to no effect on the current fires.
Conclusion 4 -- every road in a "fire prone area" needs to be cleared out to the fence line (or even beyond) so that the road acts as a real fire break. Kiss good bye to most species other than foxes, feral cats and dogs getting across such a barrier.
Conclusion 5 -- The RFS, CFA, et al need to be placed on a more sustainable footing.


plus another 100 or so

[woodPixel]

Conclusion 5 -- The RFS, CFA, et al need to be placed on a more sustainable footing.

One of the most enjoyable aspects of war are the small-group militias. Partisans, ninjas, SAS knife squads... Smash and grab, vaporise into the woodwork...

Perhaps, rather than monolithic organisations based on endless interminable hierarchy, we could use the CFA in such a manner. They look after their patch (cos everyone fights like hell to save their own), but can be rapidly deployed in other near-local groupings. Act like ants or hornets in a swarm.

Every 200 or 1000 citizens must put forward a group of people, then its provided with a truck and gear. It's kept in a shed Just In Case.

I'm certain this is how the CFA would operate now. From the people I've seen over the last few weeks, they are as rough and Aussie as they come. They'd happily tell some duded-up bureaucrat to go shove it up their Khyber.... but very happily thorw themselves into front.

(My son and I are joining. Its the right thing to do)

My fear with ScoMo is he sees things ONLY in a monolithic top-down hierarchy (e.g. "god") and They will use this to create yet-another mega department.... being in Canberra I see hundreds of these one-off political-solution one-time departments who generate nothing but pointless paperwork to justify their indefensible existences.

Nothing is done by these people by accident. ScoMo was chosen for a reason. Perhaps its good to have an idiot as the king... especially for those unseen string-pullers with the real ambitions.

[clear out]

I’m on the same page as most here but here’s a few thoughts for discussion.
The east coast of Oz was mostly rain forest way back, a lot of species that now only exist in Tas were up here.
This has been changed over the use of fire by the local original inhabitants, has anyone considered this in the call for aboriginal burning.
Also what effect have these current fires had on our remaining pockets of rainforest on the escarpment etc let alone the Wollemi region.
Has any real in depth research been done on why various society’s have collapsed in the past ?
Easter Island springs to mind but also there were a few in South America plus those in the top end of Africa that the desert overan.
Are we the next in line?
H.

[doug3030]

The east coast of Oz was mostly rain forest way back, a lot of species that now only exist in Tas were up here.
This has been changed over the use of fire by the local original inhabitants, has anyone considered this in the call for aboriginal burning.
Also what effect have these current fires had on our remaining pockets of rainforest on the escarpment etc let alone the Wollemi region.
Has any real in depth research been done on why various society’s have collapsed in the past ?

Much as many would like to deny it, humans are an integral part of the environment. Always have been, always will be as long as there are people on the Earth. Clear Out makes the excellent point that the landscape which the early settlers found when they came here was largely influenced by Aboriginal land management practices Without their influence who knows what the place would have looked like. It begs the question -"What is really the natural environment?" Is it what you get as a combination of the geology, weather patterns and flora and fauna (humans included)? Still, humans are about the only part of the equation which could possibly have any real control over the outcome, so whatever your view of who or what is responsible for the mess WE are responsible for fixing it.

Does "fixing it" necessarily mean taking it back to what it was before? I cannot see that as a satisfactory solution because WE changed it because there are now more of us to feed and accommodate than there was "before". Would Cultural burning and reintroduction of the old species of flora and fauna allow the region to support it's current population? The environment has to evolve with the growth or we have to restrict the growth. Either way it's up to the human race to manage this.

The population of Australia before the First Fleet arrived is estimated to have been 750,000. Now it is 25,000,000. Obviously things have to be a little different. We cannot go back to how it was.

[FenceFurniture]

I don't think anyone is suggesting we can go back to how it was. Is no possible.

I don't see how Cultural Burning can't fit in to the current lifestyle, as it's just a more gentle alternative to the White Fella's far more aggressive hazard reduction / back-burning.

[doug3030]

I don't see how Cultural Burning can't fit in to the current lifestyle, as it's just a more gentle alternative to the White Fella's far more aggressive hazard reduction / back-burning.

It may well be just the thing we need. We don't have to throw away everything in the past to move on to a prosperous future. All I was saying is we need to go with what works and change what doesn't. If the Aboriginal custodians can tailor the cultural burns to make the landscape support what it now has to support and not try to use it to restore what once was then why not go for it? But of course, we have continued to push back the boundaries of sustainability way beyond breaking point many times already. If we could suddenly change the environment to be perfect and sustainable for now, what will stop us from continuing to expand our numbers and demand on resources until we are once again where we are now?

[FenceFurniture]

Agreed Doug.


If the Aboriginal custodians can tailor the cultural burns to make the landscape support what it now has to support and not try to use it to restore what once was then why not go for it?I'm not sure that would really come into it because the burns would just be in bushland (I would have thought). Now that may well be privately owned bushland (i.e. the bush around somebody's buildings). I doubt it would have any place in non-bush areas, but who knows.

[doug3030]

Agreed Doug.

I'm not sure that would really come into it because the burns would just be in bushland (I would have thought). Now that may well be privately owned bushland (i.e. the bush around somebody's buildings). I doubt it would have any place in non-bush areas, but who knows.

Well, yes, it would have to be considered as part of the whole overall environmental system. There has to be a balance which means that there must be enough bushland and it must be sustainable and flourishing. Bushland is the lungs of the earth. It is also the habitat for so much of the flora and fauna which make up the all important biodiversity the greenies rightly go on about. It is a major part of keeping the whole system healthy.

[Beardy]

Does anyone know the difference between cultural burning and any other back burning operation?

The wildlife gets effected and or dies just the same.

[FenceFurniture]

All the Climate Change Deniers that I have come across or read about, and that includes Malcolm Roberts, have an enviable characteristic: they all, to an individual, claim to be open minded about it. That being the case, they should have no trouble reading this:
Have you got climate zombies? We debunk the myths that refuse to die - Science News - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-07-27/climate-change-denial-zombies-killed/11291724)

The best line is this (with reference to Climate Science being a conspiracy of the elites):
"The plot: 97 per cent of the world's scientists contrive an environmental crisis,
only to be exposed by a plucky band of billionaires and oil companies."

[ian]

I’m on the same page as most here but here’s a few thoughts for discussion.
The east coast of Oz was mostly rain forest way back, a lot of species that now only exist in Tas were up here.
This has been changed over the use of fire by the local original inhabitants, has anyone considered this in the call for aboriginal burning. If I recall correctly, indigenous land management practices 230 years ago produced an environment reasonably tolerant to fire -- early settlers talk about "park like woodlands". But I'm not sure the carrying capacity of the land was all that great. Certainly not what is required to support a 25+ Million people


Also what effect have these current fires had on our remaining pockets of rainforest on the escarpment etc let alone the Wollemi region.it's too soon to know whether the Wollemi pines survived the inferno.
As for the coastal rain forest Binna Burra burned back in October and UNESCO is asking hard questions about whether the burn has destroyed those qualities that led to the forest being declared a special region


Has any real in depth research been done on why various society’s have collapsed in the past ? well the Hopi culture in SW USA collapsed around 1300 as a result of climate change impacting their viability.
Easter Island lost their timber forest and the society went backwards.
Europe is a heavily modified landscape that has been adapting to climate change for eons.

Ancor watt (yes, my spelling is completely off) is assumed to have collapsed when the surrounding rice paddies couldn't keep up the supply of food.

Ditto various communities in South and Central America and as you mentioned, where once forests and grasslands reigned Northern Africa is mostly desert.


Are we the next in line?Unfortunately, I think so

[FenceFurniture]

Does anyone know the difference between cultural burning and any other back burning operation? Yes, intensity. It is explained very well in the video in this news article:
This is a fascinating short read on Cultural Burning, and the 10 minute HD video at the bottom is excellent. Everything they say makes complete sense.
Indigenous fire practices have been used to quell bushfires for thousands of years, experts say - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-09/indigenous-cultural-fire-burning-method-has-benefits-experts-say/11853096)



The wildlife gets affected and or dies just the same.That is highly disputable. Because of the low intensity there is much more time for critters to get out of the way. Yes, some do perish, but it is not "just the same". Furthermore, because the energy output is so much less, the heat doesn't penetrate as far underground which means wildlife from there is much less affected.

[Beardy]

If you search for reptiles in an area that is regularly culturally burnt they are not as prolific as other areas

[AlexS]

Does anyone know the difference between cultural burning and any other back burning operation?

The wildlife gets effected and or dies just the same.

I haven't watched the video posted below, but listened to a couple of interviews with the same man. As I understand it, in cultural burning the flames only reach knee height, and the temperatures are much lower. I'm not sure how that is achieved - perhaps it's shown on the video. Reportedly, it's possible to walk barefoot on the ground immediately after the fire has passed. By comparison, I looked at an RFS controlled burn that had been carried out last spring. The flames appeared to have been 2-3 metres high, and didn't appear to have killed any trees, grasses or shrubs that were living. However, there was some charring on most trees and shrubs.
It looks like most local birds, snakes and mammals survive the burn (including bloody feral cats), but I'm not sure about insects and spiders, which are just as important. A complicating factor is that this year, perhaps because of the hot, dry weather, the larger spiders, birds and insects seem to have deserted the higher ground, I suspect in favour of the lower ground close to water.

[FenceFurniture]

If you search for reptiles in an area that is regularly culturally burnt they are not as prolific as other areasMaybe (and that is only anecdotal evidence) but compared to an area that has more aggressive hazard reduction there would still be more reptiles. An area that has had a bushfire through it has virtually nil reptiles, so if cultural burning can reduce the bushfire hazard then surely that's a good thing isn't it?

Do you have evidence of that claim, or can you point to any? Have you been part of searches for reptiles?

[Beardy]

I agree with you wholeheartedly that it is better than the devastating uncontrolled fires we have been experiencing, I was just pointing out that it is not without its issues as well , not to mention the smoke hazard. The RFS have pointed this out how they have been demonised themselves for the smoke pollution from backburning in the past.

I received the information from my son who lived in an aboriginal community for over a year in the top end who regularly practice cultural burning and is also an experienced reptile spotter and photographer ( the main reason he was there)

[woodPixel]

A question I've been thinking about for a very long time:

--> At the time of European contact, why were there so FEW aboriginals here?*


Maybe, just maybe, that is all the land can support long term? Did "we" arrive at a Golden Time?


*edit: added a reference: Indigenous Australians - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Australians#Pre-colonisation)

[FenceFurniture]

I was just pointing out that it is not without its issues as well , not to mention the smoke hazard. The RFS have pointed this out how they have been demonised themselves for the smoke pollution from backburning in the past. Yes well I think it's time people from the Big Smoke got over having some off-season smoke around. CB smoke would be nowhere near as bad as conventional hazard reduction smoke either - have a look at that 10 minute video - no safety gear at all except for gloves!

I have to admit to grumbling about it myself back in the day when I was a Pro Photog in Sydney - it would bugger up the late light! I did recognise it as necessary though :D


I received the information from my son who lived in an aboriginal community for over a year in the top end who regularly practice cultural burning and is also an experienced reptile spotterThis is exactly the problem with forming an opinion based an anecdotal evidence, and why it needs to be challenged. He was only there for one season, possibly part of the second. That season may have had less reptiles around for other year to year seasonal reasons. Claims like that need to be based on several years worth of observations, regardless of how experienced someone might be. Note that I am not saying that there is no decrease in reptiles, just that the evidence is far too short term, and not really scientific.

[FenceFurniture]

--> At the time of European contact, why were there so FEW aboriginals here?I didn't think there were any humans at all....Terra Nullius and all that.

[Beardy]

Yes well I think it's time people from the Big Smoke got over having some off-season smoke around. CB smoke would be nowhere near as bad as conventional hazard reduction smoke either - have a look at that 10 minute video - no safety gear at all except for gloves!

I have to admit to grumbling about it myself back in the day when I was a Pro Photog in Sydney - it would bugger up the late light! I did recognise it as necessary though :D

This is exactly the problem with forming an opinion based an anecdotal evidence, and why it needs to be challenged. He was only there for one season, possibly part of the second. That season may have had less reptiles around for other year to year seasonal reasons. Claims like that need to be based on several years worth of observations, regardless of how experienced someone might be. Note that I am not saying that there is no decrease in reptiles, just that the evidence is far too short term, and not really scientific.

If you are searching in the same region on land that is subject to cultural burning and the adjacent area that is not and you can note a difference in wildlife populations I think that is a noteworthy reasonable observation.
Obviously the best case is to not have it burn at all but that is not realistic. I am just making the point because there are those that will think it is without a downside

Just on the smoke issue from the latest fires. Was Canberra effected more than other areas from the smoke?
I found it strange that they closed offices and public buildings because of it and yet they were probably the safest places to be with their filtration systems on their commercial AC units.

[doug3030]

The RFS have pointed this out how they have been demonised themselves for the smoke pollution from backburning in the past.

Hopefully after this round of fires people might learn to appreciate the need to do a controlled burn - cultural or otherwise. In future it would be good if people appreciate the work being done to make their property safer and thank the fireys instead of demonizing them. But there will always be those who are only happy when they have something to whine about.

In the past couple of weeks we have had a lot of smoke haze here in Melbourne and the nearest fires are hundreds of kilometers away. Surely people can put up with a few days of burning off every couple of years rather than go through this again.

[FenceFurniture]

Agreed Doug. I don't know if this already happens - perhaps it does - but the various Authorities could help "sell" the situation in advance by putting out warnings in the news ("next few days may be smoky - we've tried to select the best time yadda yadda") and also show some short footage of previous catastrophes to reinforce the point that it needs to be done. People are much less inclined to be upset if they know something is probably/possibly coming (that's basic sales training). It also gives asthmatics et al the opportunity to nick off for a while if they are in a position to do so, or buy some P2 masks.

One of the side issues that has been very slightly amusing to me is that the general population now knows what a P2 mask is - we've all known about them for years :D

[doug3030]

but the various Authorities could help "sell" the situation in advance by putting out warnings in the news ("next few days may be smoky - we've tried to select the best time yadda yadda") and also show some short footage of previous catastrophes to reinforce the point that it needs to be done. People are much less inclined to be upset if they know something is probably/possibly coming (that's basic sales training). It also gives asthmatics et al the opportunity to nick off for a while if they are in a position to do so, or buy some P2 masks.

If the authorities have not been advertising backburning activities, and I have never heard any advanced publicity for them, then it may be because if people who oppose them got advanced warning they could try to disrupt the operation or just protest somehow until the activity is called off. Maybe that attitude will change now.

[A Duke]

Hi,
The ACT has a site for upcoming , planed burns. They usually get moved around due to weather and/or available resources.
Regards

[AlexS]

Prior to a weekend of planned FR burns in a number of areas around Sydney last year, the RFS publicised that they would be happening, at least on the ABC. That didn't stop people ringing up to complain, some saying that if you live near the bush you should be prepared to put up with bushfires.

Some people are just efwits.

[tony_A]

A similar web site can be found on the TFS web site in Tassie. I have been involved in fuel reduction burning at various levels for many years and it is unusual to get adverse feedback in relation to these burns. I my time with Parks I've never had an issue with "Greenies" protesting or trying to stop fuel reduction burns(FRB's) and that includes burns in some of our iconic National Parks. There seems to be a wide public acceptance of the need for FRB's. In my experience, the arguments that Greenies are stopping FRB's is BS. Concerns from immediate neighbours are not uncommon but are generally dealt with during the planning process.
Each burn will have its own issues and these are addressed by detailing appropriate weather conditions(wind direction and speed, temperature, humidity) fuel moisture level, ignition details and suppression resources just in case. As a result the decision on which areas to burn is made with one or two days notice based on forecast weather and resource availability. There is a limited window for fuel reduction burning, either Autumn or early Winter when the soils are no longer bone dry, but not too wet, or in spring as the soils are drying out. This window seems to be reducing with the hotter drier conditions of recent years.
In terms of protecting community asserts, its generally smaller strategic burns on the urban interface that have the greatest benefit but the work and negotiating, preparing and executing one of these is substantial. When Governments mandate FRB area targets its much easier to light large remote area from the air than small resource intense burns of a few hectares on the urban interface.
However, when faced with extreme fire weather conditions FRB's can not be relied on for protection. I've seen wildfires stopped by these fuel reduced areas and I've seen wildfires burn straight over them. They certainly have a role in protecting communities in that reducing fule allows firefighters to safely operate under a greater range of weather conditions but FRB's are not a silver bullet and not the solution to our problems the some sections of the media would have us believe.

[doug3030]

... but FRB's are not a silver bullet and not the solution to our problems the some sections of the media would have us believe.

Something does not have to be a "silver bullet" to contribute to a favorable outcome. Further back in the thread someone said water bombing aircraft are not a silver bullet either. Fireys on the ground in trucks aren't silver bullets either. Nothing else in the arsenal of tools used to prevent and fight fires is a silver bullet either.

It's a matter of utilizing the strengths of all these "not silver bullets" to achieve the best outcome and that means before, during and after the fire. They all have a time and a place. Trouble is there's too much bickering and arguing about what is right ans what is wrong to let it be managed properly. If only the same energy and enthusiasm as they use in arguing was used for fire prevention and management there would not be as much of a problem.

[FenceFurniture]

Some people are just efwits.I didn't know that there was a special electronic category of them.

[Bushmiller]

Prior to a weekend of planned FR burns in a number of areas around Sydney last year, the RFS publicised that they would be happening, at least on the ABC. That didn't stop people ringing up to complain, some saying that if you live near the bush you should be prepared to put up with bushfires.

Some people are just efwits.

Alex

I have heard this line of thinking before. The last time I queried whether the person felt the same way towards flood victims too. That quietened him a little. I could have added the victims of cyclones as well. Then there is drought and towns running out of water. We are not always a compassionate nation unfortunately.

Regards
Paul

[woodPixel]

Someone asked about Canberra smoke.

For direct comparison I've no way of knowing how bad others have had it, but it has been continuous here. Some days it has been severe and dense. It tends to come and go to an extent, but I cant really recall a day in the last few weeks which was clear. It would be easy to describe it as "bad". Many building sites are closed due to it.

There have been many days and a lot of nights where sleeping with the windows open wasn't an option. On top of that weve had some blisteringly hot days (43° and most seem to be 30-33). The heat banking occurring in buildings must becoming a problem.

I bought the family these, just in case: Base Camp Mask (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07RLLCJZF) plus they came with 12 spare filters. Better than nothing and better than the toys being sold by the chemists and shysters.

Nobody I know has respiratory problems, but as we woodies can all attest, a few weeks in a dusty workshop has us all hacking a long time after.... I'd imagine doctors are being asked about A Quick Fix.

On public building closures, one can be rightly cynical about the motivations of Canberras public service when it comes to excuses for time off. I'm absolutely tired of them. Actually, I'm fed up with them. I'm not a right winger, or some raving capitalist, but by golly do they as a group know how to use the system to achieve very little.

467116