Over the holiday weekend I met a woman who works for forest service in Nevada City, California. We got to chatting about fire risk, as one does.

She noted that her county -- like every other California county -- is still approving new homes in areas ...
the forest service is very, very sure will burn, and that those new homes make it increasingly impossible to manage the forest for future fires:

To manage fire, you have to burn the forest. But if you put homes there, you can't. It's already nearly physically impossible ...
... to treat California's forests, due to the extreme slopes and remoteness of most forest lands. Sprinkle them with homes and humans, and just about all you can do is sit back and pray.

And worse: The non-burn methods needed to treat high-risk forests -- mechanical thinning ...
... or even aerial salvage logging? Mostly illegal, opposed by NIMBYs and enviros. But the kicker:

When we shut down the West Coast's logging industry to preserve old growth, we wiped out almost the entire labor pool of people qualified to thin fire-prone forest before it burns.
And even if we *did* have that labor pool, the added complexity of working around fire sprawl -- and the anti-logging politics of the people who live there now -- would make it near impossible.

The upshot of our ~ hour long rambling convesation by the river:
The fire, climate, resilience, insurance/risk professionals who work on trying to prevent even worse climate catastrophes in California are stunned by degree of cultivated ignorance of both citizens & elected officials.

It is *so much worse* than what people are talking about.
"Oh we can just adjust our insurance rules and it will be fine" folks if you wait until the insurance industry is collapsing in free-fall around you, you are decades late in getting the memo about your insane, carbrained, climate-denying land use policies.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with (((Matthew Lewis))) progressive federalism SOS

(((Matthew Lewis))) progressive federalism SOS Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @mateosfo

Jun 22
About a decade ago, while observing absurd obsequiousness to Elon Musk, I had a sense that we were entering an era of cults.

I’m completely convinced that’s true. But there’s another era that is headed for a collision with the cult era, and it’s the era of consequences —
… as in, the era of insurance actuaries.

Politics can go really far in papering over deep structural problems with narrative and re-affirmation of cult values.

But what it can’t do: Pay for stuff with money it doesn’t actually have.

And so, here comes insurance industry.
Buy a dream home in a sprawling, pastoral flood/fire zone because the cult of your local government thinks that’s fine?

Here comes the insurance industry.

Buy a “practical” SUV because, that’s what TV said you should
do — even though drivers kill & maim more people every year?
Read 8 tweets
Jun 21
Why we need fundamental reform:

Last night I attended a 3-hour transportation commission hearing about removing 5 parking spots from a public street to build a new protected bike lane next to a massive new infill housing project at a BART station.

There were ~ 45 people there.
15 of the attendees were staff for the city, for BART, and consultants.

15 of the people were NIMBYs who mistakenly think the parking “belongs to them.”

And 15 were people who are tired of driver violence and want protected bike lanes so we’re not assaulted or killed.
The staff time alone cost easily $10,000. But then, they had to prepare documents and presentations and drawings and print notices and flyers and etc. So, let’s say $50,000.

This is over 5 parking spots on a public street.

Then consider: The 15 NIMBYs who’ve come to expect …
Read 12 tweets
May 26
There’s this enduring myth about US cities that they’re crime-infested hellholes where murderers lurk around every dark corner, and what’s fucked up is …

It’s true. But the criminals are all drivers slaughtering people in the streets with their cars. latimes.com/california/sto…

Image
Even worse: Many of the most violent offenders actually live in suburbs and speed through our cities, mowing people down and crashing into homes and day care centers and restaurants and businesses — and *fight all efforts to reduce these violent crimes.*

So when a suburbanist …
… arrogantly argues that people want to live in suburbs because cities are “too loud, too polluted, too violent,” it’s massive, epic projection:

They are the ones creating *all of the noise, all of the pollution, and all of the violence.*
Read 4 tweets
Mar 26
LOL I read report, had a hunch about why Houston -- fastest-growing large city in US -- is broke.

My hunch was correct!! It's the actual cost of car sprawl coming due.

What's funny is, since the report was written by a right-wing/pro-sprawl org, they focus on "pension reform."


Image
Image
Image
Pension reform is important! But authors take pains to show pension liabilities as %, rather than actual costs.

And why is that?

Because Houston's net pension liability is less than 10% of sprawl liability. And Houston's conservatives love their massively-subsidized sprawl.
share this with your favorite "But drivers already pay the cost of roads" trolls, they're gonna absolutely hate it
Read 6 tweets
Feb 18
I’m presently on holiday and the first thing I notice when I leave US is, we really don’t have any idea what a civilized society looks or feels like, physically.

Most countries have infinitely more humanity in their streets.

We have banned it.
And it’s not like bans on humans in our cities benefits anyone — aside from the car industry, which, compared to rest of world, utterly owns our government.

Shortest life spans, highest rate of violent driver injury and death, highest cost of living/transport in the OECD …
… highest rates of childhood depression and isolation, most isolated and mobility-restricted seniors, highest carbon per capita — all of it is due to how we’ve mandated driving for every activity, and banned walking, transit, biking.

No third places, just parking lots.
Read 13 tweets
Jan 30
A bunch of years ago a very well-intentioned high school student convinced everyone he could sweep all plastic out of the ocean.

Oceanographers were quite frustrated by attention he got, because most of the plastic in the ocean is micron-scale.

And most of it is car tires.
So we now have the phenomenon of well-intentioned environmentalists who drive everywhere they go, depositing plastic in ocean as they do, killing salmon and poisoning the food chain — and some of that driving is to attend protests to ban plastic bags.

You know. For the oceans.
the performative environmentalism will continue until, is our oceans learning
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(