[HN Gopher] Wildfires in Canada are creating their own weather s...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Wildfires in Canada are creating their own weather systems, experts
       say
        
       Author : colinprince
       Score  : 68 points
       Date   : 2021-07-27 20:47 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.cbc.ca)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.cbc.ca)
        
       | Diederich wrote:
       | Y'all might already know about them, but here are some links I've
       | collected to monitor smoke.
       | 
       | https://fire.airnow.gov/
       | 
       | https://zoom.earth/
       | 
       | https://gacc.nifc.gov/nwcc/information/firemap.aspx
       | 
       | https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/#t:adv;d:2020-09-10...
       | 
       | https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/particulates/surface/l...
        
         | swader999 wrote:
         | In the post above the fire kml files that plot the active fire
         | hot spots from satellites in Google earth is hard to beat:
         | https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/usfs/active_fire/
         | 
         | You get near real time, auto refresh and very good accuracy
         | with ability to zoom in.
        
         | xrendan wrote:
         | There's also https://firesmoke.ca
        
       | brailsafe wrote:
       | We haven't had rain in a hilarious amount of time for the PNW,
       | and getting more heat warnings. We're used to summers with a
       | fairly consistent ~20deg and some rain here and there. What we've
       | been getting since mid-June is 26deg+ (outside of the crazy week
       | of over 40deg). In some cases, people are literally needing to
       | water the rainforest.
        
       | heavyset_go wrote:
       | I think it was Nova on PBS that did an episode on studying
       | weather systems created by fires, focusing on fires on the US
       | Pacific coast.
        
       | imoverclocked wrote:
       | > The fire creates the storm, and then the storm creates
       | lightning, which can cause more fires
       | 
       | > That runaway feedback is the dangerous part.
       | 
       | This is the second year I've heard the term
       | pyrocumulus/pyrocumulonimbus so prominently in relation to the
       | Sierras in California. If this happens more frequently, we might
       | lose a _lot_ of forest. It seems like that would accelerate the
       | effects of climate change... which would also amplify the
       | frequency of these events.
        
         | RadioactiveMan wrote:
         | Would we really lose them? My understanding is that, after a
         | fire, a forest experiences very rich growth, especially of
         | plants that don't grow much under the shade of old trees, which
         | are good food and cover for many animals.
        
           | jszymborski wrote:
           | Right, but it takes ages for forests to grow, and that period
           | is plenty time for CO2 emissions to run-away from us.
        
           | micro_cam wrote:
           | These current fires are much more destructive because of a
           | combination of the extreme conditions, a dense under story
           | from fire suppression and lots of standing dead wood from
           | beetle kill etc.
           | 
           | So ideally for a forest you would have small fires come
           | through regularly and clean up the under brush but leave a
           | fair number of large mature trees standing leading to open
           | fire resistant mature forest.
           | 
           | With these large super destructive fires that wipe out
           | everything you get slower reseeding which can let invasives
           | weeds take hold. And you get dense stands of young trees and
           | brush which are less fire resistant than mature forests.
           | 
           | Partial solutions include controlled burns in the wet season
           | and thinning where you shoot to leave the large mature trees
           | but reduce fuels. (This isn't always commercially viable
           | though developing wood products that can be made from small
           | trees or even brush harvested during thinning is an
           | interesting area.)
        
             | Arrath wrote:
             | > With these large super destructive fires that wipe out
             | everything you get slower reseeding which can let invasives
             | weeds take hold. And you get dense stands of young trees
             | and brush which are less fire resistant than mature
             | forests.
             | 
             | If you're real unlucky an above average wet season after a
             | super destructive fire will cause untold amounts of topsoil
             | erosion and damage, impacting the follow on reseeding even
             | more.
        
         | BurningFrog wrote:
         | Burning forests will increase the CO2 level, but since there is
         | no "local global warming", the effect is diluted over the whole
         | planet, and I'd be very surprised if the feedback effect is at
         | all significant.
        
         | bamboozled wrote:
         | Yes, this is what will happen in many areas.
        
         | slownews45 wrote:
         | There was much much more fire in the past. California is a
         | terrible example if you want to show natural / historic rates
         | of fire. I'm sure native american's burned huge quantities for
         | lots of reasons as well?
        
           | beowulfey wrote:
           | If you want to make statements like this on HN, please back
           | them up with sources.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-27 23:00 UTC)