Preventing House from Burning Down - I Will be "That Guy"...Just Not With a Garden Hose

[@darkwinter7395]

Had a wildfire get to the next hill from where we are a few years back. We could see the flames from our house, and were ready to bug out down the freeway. My next major project after I finish the solar installation is a couple of 5000 gal water tanks, because we're on well water here.

[@ReLoadersBench]

Exactly why I am now grateful (wasn't for SO many years) to have that fire hydrant in the front yard.

[@darkwinter7395]

Yeah... it's Paradise. Wood buildings in close proximity to trees, and only one road in/out.

[@ReLoadersBench]

I saw on the news a single multi-story house in Malibu along the ocean front that was the only house left standing in that area...because the homeowner had the foresight to add concrete (or some type of fire "proofing") siding to the left/right sides of the home as well as doing something for the roof for a similar type of fire protection.

[@darkwinter7395]

That's a bit of a meme that's going around about the fish... it's not accurate. My understanding of the origin is that Trump (in his first term) wanted to send more water to Central Valley nut farmers, because they largely supported him, at the expense of far northern California native fishermen (a.k.a, "Indians"; who, largely, don't support Trump), and the state government wouldn't go along with the plan. So, it was spun as "worthless fish vs needy people". Well - it turns out that it's a bit more complicated than that; because reducing the freshwater flow down the rivers from the northern areas allows saltwater to move up them from the ocean; past the point where the aqueducts that carry water to the farmers get the water from. The consequence of doing what Trump wanted to do for the farmers would have been to poison their water supply with salt. This, of course, does not excuse our _wonderful_ state government from all the other dumb stuff they do, but _that_ one isn't quite right. The problems in the LA wildfires are different: 1) Extreme winds and insufficient rainfall preceding the event created an essentially unstoppable initial firestorm; 2) The firefighting water system was designed many decades ago for typical municipal fires and not firestorms, so not only is there insufficient water storage capacity in the area but there's insufficient water pumping capability to recharge it while fighting a firestorm, so hydrants running dry was inevitable; 3) At least one reservoir was dry at the start of the event because the rubber liner had gotten damaged and the state bureaucracy had taken most of a year to get it fixed (it's still broken and won't be fixed for months yet); 4) Wood construction, while cheap initially, is prone to total devastation in a major fire event. Instead of wood, I've been saying for years that we should be building out of steel, concrete, and stone. Mass produced modular construction wall and roof units can be constructed from stamped steel and for customization covered with a variety of nonflammable coverings (or low-energy-releasing when it does burn, like paint); at scale these would be relatively inexpensive. They would also handle earthquake requirements without a problem (built in similar manner to car bodies, which routinely handle a whole lot more movement than a house does).

[@ReLoadersBench]

All good points...and I'll add a few more: 5) For years there's been the back and forth on dealing with the brush/over growth...trimming/removing and such but the environmentalists don't want the impact of change to natural growth and their surroundings. 6) PG&E (in the north) and SCE (in the south) have put shareholder value and profit above burying powerlines for decades. Shouldn't have to power down the grid every time the wind blows for fear of downed powerlines igniting a fire. We pay the highest utility rates in the nation. 7) Politics, politics, politics. Everything is spun to the point we never know the actual truth...by design.