Australia Fires

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Haha, you don't rate in the top 1,000 of the SM tarts.
You are a first rate CF tart, I'll give you that
And you are top rate mate, friend and cobber so I will always be listening when you speak

Yer not bad yourself mate..
Catchya lata..
Tart out..

[AiniA]

Originally Posted by Minggat

CNN has been reporting all along in Indonesia. Fires first started in July. So 6 months ago, and still going.

CNN International and CNN US are quite different. The International service is much better.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by BigAl.NZ

I'm sorry for the loss of animal life. Some people are talking half a billion animals (SLV) - even if its only half that its terrible.

The Australians voted in PM Scott Morrison who is a climate change denier, and his election campaign was funded by the coal industry - perhaps all that cash brought them a PM who is a denier?

I can't fathom why such a sunny place relies on coal powered power stations (solar anyone?) - oh wait that's right its because there PM is getting money from the coal and mining industry. Supporting solar would be harmful to the commercial interests of the people that subsidize him.

Even the other democratic party toned down there greenish policies for fear of not getting elected, and didn't get elected anyway.

Australia needs to vote in a person who is a (a) believes in sustainability and climate change and then (b) is also a leader.

Not sure what the Australian fires have to do with your comments about the Prime Minister, the coal industry, solar power, or climate change.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.word...limate-change/

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Exile

Not sure what the Australian fires have to do with your comments about the Prime Minister, the coal industry, solar power, or climate change.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.word...limate-change/

Be aware... Morrison wasn't voted in... the country voted to keep the other bloke out....... he has even less charisma....

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by BigAl.NZ

I'm sorry for the loss of animal life. Some people are talking half a billion animals (SLV) - even if its only half that its terrible.

The Australians voted in PM Scott Morrison who is a climate change denier, and his election campaign was funded by the coal industry - perhaps all that cash brought them a PM who is a denier?

I can't fathom why such a sunny place relies on coal powered power stations (solar anyone?) - oh wait that's right its because there PM is getting money from the coal and mining industry. Supporting solar would be harmful to the commercial interests of the people that subsidize him.

Even the other democratic party toned down there greenish policies for fear of not getting elected, and didn't get elected anyway.

Australia needs to vote in a person who is a (a) believes in sustainability and climate change and then (b) is also a leader.

What I can't fathom is how people can try to blame a situation that has been building for years on someone who was elected a few months ago.

Also, climate change is supposed to bring us more frequent and more intense cyclones. But the past several years in Eastern Aus have seen less cyclones than average.

Cyclones are a major source of rainfall. Not just on the tropical coast, but well south and well inland.

The drought is in large part a consequence of there having been so few cyclones.

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by BigAl.NZ

I'm sorry for the loss of animal life. Some people are talking half a billion animals (SLV) - even if its only half that its terrible.

The Australians voted in PM Scott Morrison who is a climate change denier, and his election campaign was funded by the coal industry - perhaps all that cash brought them a PM who is a denier?

I can't fathom why such a sunny place relies on coal powered power stations (solar anyone?) - oh wait that's right its because there PM is getting money from the coal and mining industry. Supporting solar would be harmful to the commercial interests of the people that subsidize him.

Even the other democratic party toned down there greenish policies for fear of not getting elected, and didn't get elected anyway.

Australia needs to vote in a person who is a (a) believes in sustainability and climate change and then (b) is also a leader.

Unmitigated rubbish.

Are you claiming that some sort of fire god divinity turned on the people of Australia because they voted for a conservative government.

Go outside this evening and watch the sun go down, no sun, no power from solar panels. Not rocket science.

The Big End of Town myth. The other side of politics in Australia is funded by a giant extortion racket in addition to it's support from the same people. Practically all the money spent on politics by both side of politics in Australia has as it's proximal source commerce and industry.

Many Australians have fallen for the CC/AGM propaganda even though Australia is responsible for only a small and diminishing portion of the worlds carbon emissions. Rooftop solar in Australia has one of the highesr penetrations in the world and many rural areas are now blighted with useless windmill providing intermittent, network destabilizing power.

The only cure for bush fires in Australia is prevention and even then the best we can do is mitigation. If you denuded the place of all human population it would still burn and in many instances the fires would be even more widespread.

Our Prime Minister, who has two school age children, scheduled a short holiday with his family during the school holidays. To the left side of politics and their media cronies this has been represented as the crime of the century. To his critics in NZ I say it is far less a crime than that committed by the Prime Minister of NZ in not preventing a volcanic eruption which just killed numerous people. It's quiet obvious that in some way this person has upset the lava gods.

Restrain yourselves from these unwarranted dogmas people.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Be aware... Morrison wasn't voted in... the country voted to keep the other bloke out....... he has even less charisma....

No dog in that particular fight, although I certainly do understand the notion of voting to keep someone else out!

[olaf hart]

Tassie had a dress rehearsal of this mess last year.
The lesson was not letting fires in inaccessible areas alone to burn themselves out, it doesn’t happen anymore.
As the planet heats up, we need new strategies to kill fires early, just like we do in built up areas, so more aerial resources on standby in danger zones.
It’s too late to focus on reversing GW, that time passed us by in the seventies, it’s time to focus on adapting..

[GILow]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Be aware... Morrison wasn't voted in... the country voted to keep the other bloke out....... he has even less charisma....

Yes, this pretty well summarises Australian politics. From time to time someone does get voted IN, but mostly it’s a matter of “keeping the other bugger out”.

Probably goes back to our convict roots, I’d had to ask an ethnographer to be sure.

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by olaf hart

Tassie had a dress rehearsal of this mess last year.
The lesson was not letting fires in inaccessible areas alone to burn themselves out, it doesn’t happen anymore.
As the planet heats up, we need new strategies to kill fires early, just like we do in built up areas, so more aerial resources on standby in danger zones.
It’s too late to focus on reversing GW, that time passed us by in the seventies, it’s time to focus on adapting..

Quite so. But it is very expensive. Last year, VIC loaned firefighting helicopters and their pilots to help fight Tassie's fires. They're pretty busy with their own fires right now. So, i guess the real question would be from where will come the monies to support better (more efficient, new strategies, maybe? as well as materiel)? Would the populace support higher taxation to make it happen? Another question, can we even start to guess what the unintended consequences of such action? I'll give a to the first one who comes up with a potentially viable plan....or, maybe we should ask the Firies what they want? Seems like the ones involved should also have a say....

Ann

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by olaf hart

Tassie had a dress rehearsal of this mess last year.
The lesson was not letting fires in inaccessible areas alone to burn themselves out, it doesn’t happen anymore.
As the planet heats up, we need new strategies to kill fires early, just like we do in built up areas, so more aerial resources on standby in danger zones.
It’s too late to focus on reversing GW, that time passed us by in the seventies, it’s time to focus on adapting..

Very very true and in any meaningful assessment, southern Tassie dodged a bullet. With only a sight difference in the weather conditions at the time, the whole of the Huon and Derwent valleys could have gone and potentially threatened Hobart.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

Quite so. But it is very expensive. Last year, VIC loaned firefighting helicopters and their pilots to help fight Tassie's fires. They're pretty busy with their own fires right now. So, i guess the real question would be from where will come the monies to support better (more efficient, new strategies, maybe? as well as materiel)? Would the populace support higher taxation to make it happen? Another question, can we even start to guess what the unintended consequences of such action? I'll give a to the first one who comes up with a potentially viable plan....or, maybe we should ask the Firies what they want? Seems like the ones involved should also have a say....

Ann

And don't forget that 80% of the heavy lifting is currently done volunteers - that is unsustainable IMO.

[Eder]

I don't get why over 200 arsonist acts have exacerbated the fires...why would people do this?


At any rate fire is a big rejuvenation machine...might take years but the land will be better for it.


I agree active management of the bush is more important than extinguishing all fires at all costs.


In our neck of the woods Fort McMurray burned (although with less media attention) with more people displaced and more houses burned than the Australian fires...lack of forest management for years was blamed but arson was the start of it.


We also had a few fruit cakes blaming it on global warming...

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Wotname

And don't forget that 80% of the heavy lifting is currently done volunteers - that is unsustainable IMO.

Funny how this point has been made by many yet to date rejected by the "management team" in Cantberra , but the structure, or model if you prefer, already exists in the way the army reserve system is managed and could surely be adapted to suit the volunteer firefighters. But I guess that a leader that commits 3000 reserve troops to the cause without even mentioning it to the person managing the firefighting effort (he found out via the media), then releases a cheesy self congratulatory political advertisement, really doesn't get it.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

What I can't fathom is how people can try to blame a situation that has been building for years on someone who was elected a few months ago.

..........

Originally Posted by RaymondR

........
Our Prime Minister, who has two school age children, scheduled a short holiday with his family during the school holidays. To the left side of politics and their media cronies this has been represented as the crime of the century. ........

Restrain yourselves from these unwarranted dogmas people.

I'm pretty sure thinking people aren't blaming the PM for the fires and also not expecting him to be at the end of a hose.

However his lack of leadership in the current national crisis has been dismal especially when compared to previous PMs of both persuasions. Even his mates are shaking their collective heads.

Australians probably expected him to take his kids to the beach at Christmas - it's what we do. It is a little over the top to take them to a beach on the other side of the world but hey, maybe that is the new way for this decade and there is plenty in the coffers to pay for the security etc right now (the budget has brought back into surplus next year - yes that is the future past tense) .

But we did expect him to pop back home right away when leadership was needed. Jenny could have looked after the kids for a few days and might have enjoyed a break away from hubby.

Even then, the cricket was more important and maybe it was but it doesn't past the pub test.

Of course it was accidental that the bloke from marketing has to front up as a leader. Potato Head was meant to be the top dog but was outplayed by smarter folk. Mind you, he wouldn't have stood for this disrespect nonsense - you would be in the back of the paddy wagon as quick as a flash if you refused to shake his hand.

Hopefully slomo's marketing smarts will kick in soon and he will be able to get back to the bubble - how good is the bubble now!