In Which a Clue Is Had: Fire Planning
I finally found a piece that lays out a very intelligent plan for fire risk management in California. Save this for emailing to people or using in town meetings.
Things it didn't cover that would be useful additions:
* Require disclosure of risk history and assessments in all property sales and rentals, based on area issues. In much of California the list is wildfire and earthquakes, often flood and landslide, plus tsunami along the coasts; liquefaction is much more speckled as it can be triggered by multiple causes and relies on soil type. People need to know what they are getting into.
* Close developments in areas of highest risk, especially multiple risks. People built in some places before they knew about risks, and in other cases -- particularly fire -- the risks themselves have worsened and expanded. Sure, nobody wants to undevelop land, but history is full of examples. It's cheaper and safer to do it deliberately in advance of disaster, rather than wait to admit the loss after a town has burned to the ground 3 times in 7 years. To avoid ruining lives, the government should buy back properties subject to environmental foreclosure and turn the areas into nature reserves. They'll still be at risk, but at least the wildlife will have more room to dodge around in.
I also saw a piece in Time about how some individuals are starting to decide that it's not worth living in a place that has flooded repeatedly. The big banks, of course, are ruthlessly reselling those properties as livable.
We are at a point when normal people are just starting to notice something is wrong with climate-vulnerable property locations. That means, if you're currently living somewhere with little or no future due to climate change, time is running out. The bubble will burst and formerly valuable properties will become worthless. You still have a reasonable chance of unloading bad goods on suckers, if you consider that ethical. If you don't, well, you're pretty much screwed as there don't seem to be buyback plans yet. *ponder* Well, if you live near an Indian reservation, you could always ask if they want the property; a few of them have money for buying land.
Things it didn't cover that would be useful additions:
* Require disclosure of risk history and assessments in all property sales and rentals, based on area issues. In much of California the list is wildfire and earthquakes, often flood and landslide, plus tsunami along the coasts; liquefaction is much more speckled as it can be triggered by multiple causes and relies on soil type. People need to know what they are getting into.
* Close developments in areas of highest risk, especially multiple risks. People built in some places before they knew about risks, and in other cases -- particularly fire -- the risks themselves have worsened and expanded. Sure, nobody wants to undevelop land, but history is full of examples. It's cheaper and safer to do it deliberately in advance of disaster, rather than wait to admit the loss after a town has burned to the ground 3 times in 7 years. To avoid ruining lives, the government should buy back properties subject to environmental foreclosure and turn the areas into nature reserves. They'll still be at risk, but at least the wildlife will have more room to dodge around in.
I also saw a piece in Time about how some individuals are starting to decide that it's not worth living in a place that has flooded repeatedly. The big banks, of course, are ruthlessly reselling those properties as livable.
We are at a point when normal people are just starting to notice something is wrong with climate-vulnerable property locations. That means, if you're currently living somewhere with little or no future due to climate change, time is running out. The bubble will burst and formerly valuable properties will become worthless. You still have a reasonable chance of unloading bad goods on suckers, if you consider that ethical. If you don't, well, you're pretty much screwed as there don't seem to be buyback plans yet. *ponder* Well, if you live near an Indian reservation, you could always ask if they want the property; a few of them have money for buying land.