Plastic bags, climate change, renewable energy,

[leitch]

Sorry but how do aerial incendiaries constitute controlled burning? WTAF.

 

[hifiandmtb]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-02/prescribed-burn-decimates-numbat-habitat-wa/100110960

"If you want to do a lot of hectares fast and cheaply this is the sort of result you get," she said.

 

[pink poodle]

So proud to be Strayan:

View attachment 374754

Honestly, we are a cunty nation of cunts.

I like numbats. I hope this makes all those fuckwits demanding more back burning in 2019 realise how fucking stupid they are.

 

[Freediver]

I like numbats. I hope this makes all those fuckwits demanding more back burning in 2019 realise how fucking stupid they are.

Fuckwits are demanding more backburning because they don't understand the terminology and confuse it with "controlled" or fuel reduction burns.

 

[mark22]

Sorry but how do aerial incendiaries constitute controlled burning? WTAF.

That's how fuel reduction burns are lit via ping pong looking inceduries sometimes via helicopters and vehicles. Nothing sinister it's just practicality.
Been done this way for decades in forests.

 

[Haakon]

That's how fuel reduction burns are lit via ping pong looking inceduries sometimes via helicopters and vehicles. Nothing sinister it's just practicality.
Been done this way for decades in forests.

Some of it is. Most of it is hand lit with drip torches.

All of it is useless for protecting in any way against big fires, but gives the conservatives something more to whinge about. Fuckwits.

 

[Freediver]

Some of it is. Most of it is hand lit with drip torches.

All of it is useless for protecting in any way against big fires, but gives the conservatives something more to whinge about. Fuckwits.

Not in Vic. Ping pong balls from the sky are the standard way of cleaning up a logging coup and burning remote areas thet don't need to be burnt to meet targets for fuel reduction.

 

[Haakon]

Not in Vic. Ping pong balls from the sky are the standard way of cleaning up a logging coup and burning remote areas thet don't need to be burnt to meet targets for fuel reduction.

It was in Victoria that I did a few seasons with DSE doing controlled burns. We used drip torches - mix of half petrol and diesel that we walked along dropping like napalm.

As useless as the whole process is, it was kinda fun bouncing around the bush in 4WD setting fire to shit! Totally no pyros on those crews

 

[mark22]

Some of it is. Most of it is hand lit with drip torches.

All of it is useless for protecting in any way against big fires, but gives the conservatives something more to whinge about. Fuckwits.

That's bullshit, less fuel = smaller/less intense fires, it is however hard to achieve on a large scale.

 

[Haakon]

That's bullshit, less fuel = smaller/less intense fires, it is however hard to achieve on a large scale.

Its not bullshit. Fuel reduction burns remove low level undergrowth - big fires jump from crown to crown.

 

[pink poodle]

Its not bullshit. Fuel reduction burns remove low level undergrowth - big fires jump from crown to crown.

So we need to cut down more trees and thin out the forests? Or should we have people in there sweeping and raking?

 

[Haakon]

So we need to cut down more trees and thin out the forests? Or should we have people in there sweeping and raking?

Cut down all the trees. It’s the only way to be sure.

 

[hifiandmtb]

As long as we define the reason why we are carrying out hazard reduction:

The Facts About Hazard Reduction | Climate Council

The term 'hazard reduction' has been thrown around a lot in the wake of the 2019/20 bushfire season, but what does it really mean? We’ve decided to set the record straight and present the facts on hazard reduction and the role of climate change in this catastrophic bushfire season.

www.climatecouncil.org.au

Bushfires will only continue to get worse — and prescribed burning more difficult to carry out safely — as climate change continues to escalate.
Unless we address climate change and urgently reduce our emissions as part of a global effort, the window of opportunity for prescribed burning will continue to shrink. And as bushfire weather worsens, the effectiveness of hazard reduction will diminish. No amount of hazard reduction will protect human lives, animals and properties from catastrophic fires.

 

[pink poodle]

It feels good and is a visible signs that we are doing something about the risks. Could you imagine the chaos of a massive bush fire that could happen if a numbat or other marsupial was to catch on fire and run through the forest?

 

[mark22]

Its not bullshit. Fuel reduction burns remove low level undergrowth - big fires jump from crown to crown.

That's the whole reason for fuel reduction fires is to try and prevent/limit big fires.
Sure the catastrophic days it's going to be unstoppable until conditions are favouroble.
Doing nothing will only make matters worse. If you have a better way of managing the forests I'm keen to hear it.

 

[hifiandmtb]

Can't manage them, that's the point. Climate change will fuck this place.

Move people out of danger, the end.

 

[Haakon]

That's the whole reason for fuel reduction fires is to try and prevent/limit big fires.
Sure the catastrophic days it's going to be unstoppable until conditions are favouroble.
Doing nothing will only make matters worse. If you have a better way of managing the forests I'm keen to hear it.

Healthy forests do not need management. Deal with climate change, leave forests alone so they get a chance to mature and accept that they burn.

 

[Haakon]

It feels good and is a visible signs that we are doing something about the risks. Could you imagine the chaos of a massive bush fire that could happen if a numbat or other marsupial was to catch on fire and run through the forest?

Bloody numbats... they had it coming.

 

[Freediver]

That's the whole reason for fuel reduction fires is to try and prevent/limit big fires.
Sure the catastrophic days it's going to be unstoppable until conditions are favouroble.
Doing nothing will only make matters worse. If you have a better way of managing the forests I'm keen to hear it.

No, the main reason for the amount of fuel reduction burning that is done is propaganda. The conservatives have everybody hoodwinked into believing the answer to bushfires, rather than listening to the scientists is fuel reduction burns and that it's got nothing to do with climate change or years of mismanagement by the logging industry.

Of course there is a time and place for fuel reduction but current methods are not based on current science.

 

[beeb]

There's the small issue of reduction burns making the forest more flammable when it regrows as well...