Peter Eater Posted January 18 Posted January 18 What actually happened with those dry fire hydrants, rather than the guesswork, grandstanding and Fox propaganda posted above, will be found in reporting form a major newspaper: Inside L.A.'s desperate battle for water as the Palisades fire exploded WWW.LATIMES.COM When fire hydrants ran dry, the L.A. Department of Water and Power struggled to get water where needed. The utility's operations chief explains the decisions as the fire... Lotus-eater, MikeBiDude and + augustus 1 1 1
MikeBiDude Posted January 18 Posted January 18 1 hour ago, Peter Eater said: What actually happened with those dry fire hydrants, rather than the guesswork, grandstanding and Fox propaganda posted above, will be found in reporting form a major newspaper: Inside L.A.'s desperate battle for water as the Palisades fire exploded WWW.LATIMES.COM When fire hydrants ran dry, the L.A. Department of Water and Power struggled to get water where needed. The utility's operations chief explains the decisions as the fire... Facts! Thank you. Lotus-eater, + augustus and Peter Eater 1 1 1
+ augustus Posted January 18 Posted January 18 7 hours ago, Peter Eater said: Nope, you obviously didn’t read the front page LA Times story on the subject. Your post is wrong, false and irrelevant. Like the LA Times is the Gospel. LA does have 114 water "tanks" which are woefully insufficient for an area of millions of people. pubic_assistance 1
+ augustus Posted January 18 Posted January 18 (edited) 2 hours ago, Peter Eater said: What actually happened with those dry fire hydrants, rather than the guesswork, grandstanding and Fox propaganda posted above, will be found in reporting form a major newspaper: Inside L.A.'s desperate battle for water as the Palisades fire exploded WWW.LATIMES.COM When fire hydrants ran dry, the L.A. Department of Water and Power struggled to get water where needed. The utility's operations chief explains the decisions as the fire... Just read the article. YEAH..................RAN OUT OF WATER BECAUSE THERE IS NO CAPACITY IN THE SYSTEM. You need large reservoirs to have adequate supply and water pressure. LA doesn't have THAT. What is so difficult to understand?????? Edited January 18 by augustus pubic_assistance 1
pubic_assistance Posted January 18 Posted January 18 5 hours ago, nate_sf said: Rationally, it would make sense not to rebuild at all, but that's not realistic. Rational thinking is definitley not something Californa is known for. Yes. Absolutely. There should be ZERO redevelopment in this neighborhood. The state should condemn the entire area and return it to mother nature.
Lotus-eater Posted January 18 Posted January 18 48 minutes ago, MikeBiDude said: Facts! Thank you. Perhaps they qualify as facts to their baby boomer readership. The story amounts to spin control for the LADWP, which has a sad history of incompetence, inefficiency, and corruption. Not surprisingly, the story ends with the LADWP official wanting more money from ratepayers. + Vegas_Millennial, + augustus and BSR 1 2
+ augustus Posted January 18 Posted January 18 5 minutes ago, Lotus-eater said: The story amounts to spin control for the LADWP, Exactly. And for CA boosters that are embarrassed. Yes, there could have been large scale damage even with enough water pressure. But when you have fire hydrants running DRY IN NO TIME, your water infrastructure just sucks. pubic_assistance and Lotus-eater 1 1
Lotus-eater Posted January 18 Posted January 18 Here is an interesting thread on the history, causes, and mitigation measures. Key points: 1) These areas have experienced fires for a long time, but prescribed burns (which residents and environmentalists dislike) have largely been replaced with active fire suppression, which does not reduce fuel. Also, buildings built before 2007 when new regulations went into effect are not as fire resilient. 2) Contrary to those who say that reducing fuel cannot make a significant difference in these type of fires, her case study interprets the Thomas Fire as a success because it significantly limited the potential damage: "Despite the extreme wind conditions and interviewee estimates of potentially hundreds of homes being consumed, only seven primary residences were destroyed by the Thomas Fire, and firefighters indicated that pre-fire mitigation activities played a clear, central role in the outcomes observed." Conclusion: As I said above, people need to hire more goats. @pyrogeog.bsky.social on Bluesky BSKY.APP Here's the reality about the #LAFires this week: this isn't the first time ANY of these places have burned. Not even... + Vegas_Millennial and + augustus 1 1
Shoedog112 Posted January 19 Posted January 19 On 1/16/2025 at 8:58 AM, Peter Eater said: The misinformation (and in a few notable cases, disinformation) being posted here is unfortunate, especially as the disastrous emergency continues to unfold. So far, I have 11 friends whose homes have been destroyed. There are likely to be more. @Peter Eater don’t waste your time trying to battle people who get their info from Fox News. + augustus, Lotus-eater, + Vegas_Millennial and 2 others 3 1 1
nate_sf Posted January 19 Posted January 19 7 hours ago, pubic_assistance said: Rational thinking is definitley not something Californa is known for. Yes. Absolutely. There should be ZERO redevelopment in this neighborhood. The state should condemn the entire area and return it to mother nature. While it's currently fashionable to bash California, the irrationality of rebuilding applies to pretty much any neighborhood that's been in the path of a disaster. Yes, California leads the nation in wildfires, but it's followed closely by... Georgia. Who would have guessed? And after Georgia, it's Texas, followed by North Carolina, Florida, Arizona, Oklahoma, and South Carolina, in that order. Yet none of those other states attract the scorn that's directed at California. And the damage from wildfires is dwarfed by the damage caused by hurricanes and flooding. The problem is that whenever a community is ravaged by a disaster (whether hurricane, flood, or wildfire), everyone's first impulse is to rebuild as quickly as possible. Hardly anybody is going to accept that their home needs to be returned to mother nature, whether they be in California, Georgia, or the Carolinas... as rational as that should be! pubic_assistance, Shoedog112 and + Vegas_Millennial 2 1
+ augustus Posted January 19 Posted January 19 46 minutes ago, nate_sf said: The problem is that whenever a community is ravaged by a disaster (whether hurricane, flood, or wildfire), everyone's first impulse is to rebuild as quickly as possible. Hardly anybody is going to accept that their home needs to be returned to mother nature, whether they be in California, Georgia, or the Carolinas... as rational as that should be! Yes, you are correct. And that's starting to change in Fl, CA, NJ, etc. With much higher insurance rates coming, people can choose to live where they want but they should PAY for that risk out of their own pocket, as it should be. Florida real estate owners are paying much more now for the risk of hurricanes and building on marsh land. NJ shore owners are paying more for living in flood prone areas along the Atlantic. What amazes me about the LA fires is that some people here accept no responsibility for it and having a shitty water delivery system had no effect whatsoever (and they get insulted when you say their water delivery system sucks). There were dozens of homes along the coast with a mountain behind them that caught fire because of flying embers and the Fire Department was there and there was no water in the fire hydrants. If they had water, they could have hosed down those homes and saved them. That's what the fire captain said. It was on the news. Shoedog112 and Peter Eater 2
+ augustus Posted January 19 Posted January 19 (edited) 6 hours ago, Shoedog112 said: don’t waste your time trying to battle people who get their info from Fox News. Yeah, it's all Fox News' faulty...lmao....not that there are fire hydrants with no water.....absolutely hysterical. No wonder you have Governor William J. LePetomane. Edited January 19 by augustus + Italiano 1
Shoedog112 Posted January 19 Posted January 19 9 minutes ago, augustus said: Yeah, it's all Fox News' faulty...lmao....not that there are fire hydrants with no water.....absolutely hysterical. No wonder you have Governor William J. LePetomane. ??? Sorry, I’m not following your odd humor or sarcasm. I must be too young to understand a reference about a character from a movie? Have a good night. NipLuvr212, Peter Eater and + Italiano 3
Peter Eater Posted January 19 Posted January 19 17 hours ago, augustus said: Like the LA Times is the Gospel. LA does have 114 water "tanks" which are woefully insufficient for an area of millions of people. Even the gospel isn’t the gospel. But cheap dismissals merely expose your vacuousness. + Vegas_Millennial, + augustus, pubic_assistance and 1 other 1 3
pubic_assistance Posted January 19 Posted January 19 10 hours ago, nate_sf said: The problem is that whenever a community is ravaged by a disaster (whether hurricane, flood, or wildfire), everyone's first impulse is to rebuild as quickly as possible. This is true. I've pondered this stupidity since I was a kid. I grew up in the Susquehanna River Valley which floods every few years and significantly so every fifteen. I've watched several charming villages destroyed over and over only to be rebuilt right in the same spot again, with an absolute guarantee of being destroyed again. New Orelans comes to mind when I think of this fire. Huge swaths of land destroyed and through a combination of disorganization, corruption and sheer stupidity, the homeowners were allowed to rebuild right in the worst flood zone. Sparse reconstruction leaves dozens of rat infested lots between homes and creates a disconnected community. Effective leadership would have condemned the worst of the area, leaving it for planned flooding and pushed the homeowners who wanted to return to the outer edges furtherest from the flood zone. Same goes for this fire. They need a buffer zone between wildfire 🔥 prone areas and residential construction. There should be no more homes than there is water to protect them. This is all rather obvious. I've studied urban design in school...and this is all pretty common knowledge. Yet this is California, so common sense is in short supply. It always has been. Overdevelopment is a fact of life there...and not one person refuses the kickbacks the real estate industry provides to stay silent. BSR 1
Peter Eater Posted January 19 Posted January 19 11 hours ago, nate_sf said: Yet none of those other states attract the scorn that's directed at California. Jealousy is a green-eyed monster. But if I lived in the crap places these folks live in, I would be jealous too. BSR, + augustus, pubic_assistance and 1 other 4
Peter Eater Posted January 19 Posted January 19 5 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said: I grew up in the Susquehanna River Valley Condolences. I lived there several years, and god it was awful. 😣 thomas, BSR and pubic_assistance 1 1 1
pubic_assistance Posted January 19 Posted January 19 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Peter Eater said: Jealousy is a green-eyed monster. But if I lived in the crap places these folks live in, I would be jealous too. You seem very personally angered about people finding fault with this district. Do you work as a district representative? You seem to have a personal stake in the matter, because you keep refuting fact, to paint a more rosy picture of the sheer incompetence of those in charge of infrastructure. 🤔 Edited January 19 by pubic_assistance spelling BSR and + Vegas_Millennial 2
pubic_assistance Posted January 19 Posted January 19 2 minutes ago, Peter Eater said: Condolences. I lived there several years, and god it was awful. 😣 What an odd statement. The Susquehanna river valley is beautiful. The only "awful" parts are Harrisburg and Sunbury, both of which filled up with a lot of welfare families who brought crime to the area. + augustus and + Vegas_Millennial 1 1
Peter Eater Posted January 19 Posted January 19 18 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said: The Susquehanna river valley is beautifu Boring, too. pubic_assistance 1
Peter Eater Posted January 19 Posted January 19 23 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said: You seem very personally angered about people finding fault with this district. Do you work as a district representative? You seem to have a personal stake in the matter, because you keep refuting fact, to paint a more rosy picture of the sheer incompetence of those in charge of infrastructure. 🤔 “District”? Uh… Yeah, it’s Infrastructure Week here at COM, where know-nothings get to bloviate about some “district” that’s free of “common sense.” 🤪😂 pubic_assistance 1
RadioRob Posted January 19 Posted January 19 And we're done here. If the bull crap continues, some folks will be taking a vacation. I would highly recommend some folks take a valium. + Vegas_Millennial and pubic_assistance 2
Recommended Posts