iirc the long-term explanation of wildfires is that building human habitations too close to natural fire zones leads to over-aggressive control of small fires leading to underbrush build up over years and bigger fires. Is this roughly correct?
-
-
Replying to @vgr
pretty sure climate change and related droughts also have been playing a role
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JodyShenn
Yup, they've acted as a compounding factor on base dynamics.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
I mean, there’s always wildfires (they’re natural and good!) but if the question is why suddenly more extreme probably base dynamics aren’t relevant. You’re looking for delta.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JodyShenn
Yeah, but the base dynamics themselves are shifting too don't forget, causing an organic delta (eg: increased population and more pressure on fringes). Important for climate action advocates to keep the attribution book-keeping honest.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Yeah, I’d agree that truth is power and don’t know enough to really say, but I don’t see any broad change in those dynamics recently (e.g. Seattle yes but CA no)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JodyShenn
It's longer term than a few yearshttp://www.ppic.org/publication/californias-population/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
Ok I do appreciate catastrophe theory but seems weird that it’d be biggest factor now after growth significantly slowed in recent decades there vs a different trajectory for growth in WA. But again I certainly don’t know!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yeah, that's why I'm being careful. Plus climate change is phenomenologically a multiplier type effect not a direct effect so you need to consider what base is doing anyway.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.