myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Wildfires and global warming
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 4894

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you actually believe that I advocate for coal fired power plants? Please! As for "increased fire risk" you may wish to look at the attached. It seems that fires have not increased, it is people near fires.

https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_stats_totalFires.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 3918

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mrgybe

True to form, you cherry picked the data to make your point.

The fire data from prior to 1983 and expressly prior to 1960 were compiled using suspect data gathering techniques. In addition, land in the South East was cleared using fires in the early parts of the previous century.

There is clear correlation that wildfire intensity and size has increased over the past 15 years.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-how-global-warming-has-increased-us-wildfires

Since you don't advocate coal, maybe you meant to compare wind power to natural gas? Natural gas is still 40 times as carbon intensive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 4894

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 10:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
True to form, you cherry picked the data to make your point.

The NIFC is the government agency charged with coordinating wildfire response across the country. They caution that numbers the earlier years may not be entirely accurate, but are you suggesting that those numbers are complete nonsense and bear no relation to what actually happened? Why would they do that? Do you have numbers that are more credible? All you offer is an opinion piece from an advocacy group whose mission is to prove that climate change is real and who, ironically, cite the NIFC's expertise a number of times in the piece you regard as a rebuttal. Talk about cherry pick.

coboardhead wrote:
Natural gas is still 40 times as carbon intensive.

Citation please.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 3918

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mrgybe

The comparison of natural gas to wind was in the same source as the comparison of coal to wind. If you are really interested, I am happy to repost that source (if this site will let me)


The NIFC, in your link, actually states the same thing about the data prior to 1983. The source I used, directly, quotes the NIFC officials. The information on historic fires does not relate to today's fires both in methodology of the survey of the fire and what was included in the fires.

From your source (did you read your own source?)

Quote:
Prior to 1983, sources of these figures are not known, or cannot be confirmed, and were not derived from the current situation reporting process. As a result the figures prior to 1983 should not be compared to later data.


For example. The area near me, where I used to have a house is a ranching and farming community that uses irrigation. Every spring the farmers burn their fields and irrigation ditches to eliminate weeds. Thousands of acres each spring. These are not included as wild land fires in today's tabulation.

I am not cherry picking data. I presented an evaluation of the reliable data. I went through the graphs and charts in my source with a critical eye. If you have a particular problem with some of the methodology presented in my source or the conclusions they reached, please elaborate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 4894

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I did read the caveat before posting the link, but I was comfortable that their data would be a reasonable indication of activity over the past century. I think we can agree that the NIFC has extensive knowledge and data of wildfires in the US. That's their job and posting their findings is not cherry picking. The data that they have chosen to publish indicates that, many times in the last century, wildfires consumed 5 to 10 times the acreage consumed in recent years. That contradicts your assertion that wildfires have increased. So, I ask again, do you believe that the data they have presented is completely detached from reality and uses a different basis for older years than for recent years? It would be utterly irresponsible of them to publish data that is wildly inaccurate and misleading. Why would they do that?

I'm not sure which source you are referring to which asserts that NG has 40 times the carbon footprint of wind power. Perhaps you can direct me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vientomas



Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 1938

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2830/six-trends-to-know-about-fire-season-in-the-western-us/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 3918

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 3918

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK About 1/2 the time I try a link this site kicks me out and it does it on every device I have....

Mrgybe. My source on the carbon effects of wind vs natural gas was provided in the link by Fact Check. About 5 posts ago.

Yes, I take the NIFC at their word not to use the older data. Is it irresponsible to publish data that is not gathered the same as current data? Of course it is IF they indicate that the data is not reliable but may have historical use. What is irresponsible is using suspect date to draw conclusions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 3918

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To elaborate.

The tools and the accuracy to measuring wildfires has changed significantly over the past century. This is in line with the changes in surveying, increases in access and more accurate maps.

One example. Current wildfires are not measured by the perimeter of the fire. The fire size deducts the areas within the perimeter that did NOT burn. This can be substantial. It took a bit of time, locally, to define the extent of the fire that we had here since there were large tracts of unburned forest within the perimeter of the fire. ie the reported fire size was smaller after the fire was over and the area could be evaluated to determine, really, how large the fire was.

That would have been a difficult task in 1930. And, there would have been no reason to gather accurate information.

Mrgybe. Why the push to use inaccurate data? Shouldn't we be looking at trends during the time we DO have accurate data?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 15667
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2020 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why does he spin? He is a shill.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next
Page 21 of 24

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group