Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth United States

California's Wildfires: Livestreams from Burning Homes and Dire Text Messages - Sometimes Erroneous (msn.com) 150

Posted by EditorDavid from the sad-news dept.
As the ecological disaster continues, CNN reports the Palisades Fire near Malibu, California has burned at least 22,660 acres, left 100,000 peope under evacuation orders, left at least 11 people dead and "destroyed thousands of homes and other structures." From the last reports it was only 11% contained, and "flames are now spreading east in the Mandeville Canyon area, approaching Interstate 405, one of LA's busiest freeways."

But the Atlantic's assistant editor wrote Friday that "I have received 11 alerts. As far as I can tell, they were all sent in error." My home is not in a mandatory evacuation zone or even a warning zone. It is, or is supposed to be, safe. Yet my family's phones keep blaring with evacuation notices, as they move in and out of service....

Earlier today, Kevin McGowan, the director of Los Angeles County's emergency-management office, acknowledged at a press conference that officials knew alerts like these had gone out, acknowledged some of them were wrong, and still had no idea why, or how to keep it from happening again. The office did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but shortly after this article was published, the office released a statement offering a preliminary assessment that the false alerts were sent "due to issues with telecommunications systems, likely due to the fires' impacts on cellular towers" and announcing that the county's emergency notifications would switch to being managed through California's state alert system...

The fifth, sixth, and seventh evacuation warnings came through at around 6 a.m. — on my phone.
At the same time a Los Angeles-area couple "spent two hours watching a live stream of flames closing in on their home," reports the Washington Post, and at one point "saw firefighters come through the house and extinguish flames in the backyard." At around 4:30 p.m. Eastern time on Tuesday, the camera feeds gave out and the updates from their security system stopped. About four hours later, [Zibby] Owens's husband got an alert on his cellphone that the indoor sprinkler system had gone off and the fire alarm had been activated. They do not know the current status of their home, Owens said on Tuesday.

Real estate agent Shana Tavangarian Soboroff said in a phone interview Thursday that one set of clients had followed their Pacific Palisades home's ordeal this week in a foreboding play-by-play of text alerts from an ADT security system. The system first detected smoke, then motion, next that doors had been opened, and finally fire alerts before the system lost communication. Their home's destruction was later confirmed when someone returned to the neighborhood and recorded video, Tavangarian Soboroff said.
Soboroff also lost her home in the fire, the article adds. Burned to the ground are "the places where people raised their kids," Zibby Owens wrote in this update posted Friday. But "even if my one home, or 'structure' as newscasters call it, happens to be mostly OK, I've still lost something I loved more than anything. We've all lost it... [M]y heart and soul are aching across the country as I sit alone in my office and try to make sense of the devastation." [I]t isn't about our house.

It's about our life.

Our feelings. Our community. Our memories. Our beloved stores, restaurants, streets, sidewalks, neighbors. It's about the homes where we sat at friends' kitchen tables and played Uno, celebrated their birthdays, and truly connected.

It's all gone... [E]very single person I know and so many I don't who live in the Palisades have lost everything. Not just one or two friends. Everyone.

And then I saw video footage of our beloved village. The yogurt shop and Beach Street? Gone. Paliskates, our kids' favorite store? Gone. Burned to the ground.

Gelson's grocery store, where we just recently picked up the New York Post and groceries for the break? Gone...

The. Whole. Town.

How? How is it possible?

How could everyone have lost everything? Schools, homes, power, cell service, cars, everything. All their belongings...

All the schools, gone. It's unthinkable....

I've worked in the local library and watched the July 4 parade from streets that are now smoldering embers...

It is an unspeakable loss.
"Everyone I know in the Palisades has lost all of their possessions," the author writes, publishing what appear to be text messages from friends.

"It's gone."
"We lost everything."
"Nothing left."
"We lost it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California's Wildfires: Livestreams from Burning Homes and Dire Text Messages - Sometimes Erroneous More

California's Wildfires: Livestreams from Burning Homes and Dire Text Messages - Sometimes Erroneous

Comments Filter:

  • Sad stories everywhere (Score:5, Interesting)

    by EditorDavid ( 4512125 ) Works for Slashdot on Saturday January 11, 2025 @02:36PM (#65081271)
    One more story shared by a climate report who lives in the Pacific Palisades [nymag.com]:

    ___________________________________________________
    It finally hit me that we might not have a home to go back to and that I was going to be pregnant and homeless. My partner and I started remembering things we had left behind — my grandfather’s chain and a pre-digital picture of my partner and his dad that he’d never be able to get back. Then we watched our neighborhood burn to the ground, live on TV... The following morning, I had a call from my neighbor, who told me that amid the ashen remains of multimillion-dollar homes, our little group of condos had survived. It was then that I started sobbing. We decided to go back home and retrieve a few keepsakes left behind, hoping my press pass would allow us to get into the danger zone.

    Driving up Sunset Boulevard, we saw firefighters. “Oh my God,” I said, “they’re here.” Blocked off by trucks, my partner tried to take the back route through an alleyway, only to find another fire engine parked in the way. Taking another run down Sunset, we finally saw our home, now a pile of embers, still burning. We parked and got out for a closer look. A group of firefighters told us they were sorry.

    Going around back again, on foot this time, I made it closer and doubled over in pain at the sight — all of the other homes were destroyed too. ____________________________________________

  • Why don't all rich in LA have roof sprinklers? (Score:3)

    by Pinky's Brain ( 1158667 ) on Saturday January 11, 2025 @02:39PM (#65081277)

    Even with a grid independent pump and water storage (pool works) it's a rounding error in the yearly maintenance budget of many of the people whose homes are burning.

    • With the kind of heat a wildfire brings, I'm not sure how long a pool full of water could hold off the flames. Obviously longer than NOT using the pool, but with the scale of these things you just can't defend a single home, you have to fight large sections with backburning and such.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Cyberax ( 705495 )

        With the kind of heat a wildfire brings, I'm not sure how long a pool full of water could hold off the flames.

        A pool and a sprinkler system would work quite well. The wildfire in Palisades was not the kind that creates its own weather and fire tornadoes, but a regular house-to-house. It's just that houses there are tinderboxes.

    • Many of those people are not really rich and have only that one pile of embers and a mortgage that still needs to be paid. I own multiple properties in multiple countries and I am not rich either - I just learned long ago that it is wise to diversify.

      • >Many of those people are not really rich and have only that one pile of embers and a mortgage that still needs to be paid.

        Well, if your uninsured home is all you had and it's mortgaged (Really? Banks allow you to have a mortgage without insurance?)... seems like declaring bankruptcy is appropriate. You're already fucked, might as well take the credit hit and escape a large pile of unrecoverable debt.

        • Mortgage lenders require borrowers to have insurance. It is in the contract. Also, majority on home loans are non-recourse meaning that lenders cannot go after you for the remainder of the balance if home value is below loan amount.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Temkin ( 112574 )

            Mortgage lenders require borrowers to have insurance. It is in the contract.

            And the insurance is separate from the mortgage. Lots of insurance companies are pulling out of California. Thousands of policies were not renewed 4 months ago in the Palisades area. Did they all manage to find new coverage by Jan 1st? Or did they get the state emergency insurance plan?

        • Re:Why don't all rich in LA have roof sprinklers? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by sfcat ( 872532 ) on Saturday January 11, 2025 @04:39PM (#65081501)
          The insurance companies pulled out of this neighborhood about 6 months ago. All policies were cancelled. They said the state wouldn't let them raise the premiums to a level required to offset the risk. Before you say, greedy insurance companies, 1) they were right, and 2) if they did write these policies, the rest of us end up subsidizing their much more expensive homes. Just though everyone should know this before piling on about insurance.

          • Ever since I started listening to what reinsurer actuaries are saying, I'm not calm at all...
            If the FAIR plan needs to fall back on backup sources of money to pay out, things might spiral really fast for many more people than those directly affected by the fires.

            • I can't imagine FAIR working. It's just a bunch of voters say, "hey, instead of what this service costs, let's just pay this lower amount instead! That'll work!"

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

            But the reason the rate increase limits were put in place was decades of profiteering. The insurance carriers were exploitative, now they find themselves hemmed in by a (deliberately) slow bureaucracy because they couldn't be trusted to behave themselves. I don't feel sorry for them, especially since this lets them skip the whole step of giving TTFO (told to fuck off) quotes to chase people away.

            • But the reason the rate increase limits were put in place was decades of profiteering

              So obviously the solution is to never let insurance companies raise their premiums again. How stupid.

              I don't feel sorry for them

              Why should you? They aren't required to insure anyone, and so they stopped insuring these high-risk properties that they couldn't collect appropriate premiums for. If anything the insurance companies saved a FORTUNE because of this. Think of all the money they get to keep and not pay out to replace these homes!

              Oh wait, maybe you're talking about not feeling sorry for the real victims, which are the homeowner

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

                The insurers are just going out of state and selling at the rate they want as non-admitted carriers. Why should I feel sorry for them? When there is a shortage of admitted carriers, all it takes is for a single agent or broker to collect three declinations from admitted markets and then the client is free to choose from the "surplus" market (which is all there is now).

                What's so hard to understand? Carriers were dicks, they got handcuffed. Turns out those handcuffs don't allow them to move as quickly as they

            • Agreed, insurers were very predatory for many decades, it is not something that's new. We really should go with a non profit insurance style, despite the politicians kissing for-profit asses. Then there'd be more transparency about rates and coverage with no massive suprises when after 30 years you make your first claim.

          • It's going to happen in many states. Maybe they raise the rates on a moderate home to the point where they have to just not have insurance, or move out, regardless of insurance regulation or the lack of it. Florida's also a prime disaster location, and hurricanes are getting worse, just like fires are getting worse, and idiots claiming political reasons for it aren't going to stop that.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by adrn01 ( 103810 )
      I wonder why houses in such areas aren't being made exclusively of brick, stone, or maybe adobe with a waterproof covering sprayed on? Enough clay in the adobe, maybe a fire turns walls into ceramic?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

        Because it's a seismically active area, and building in those materials risks having the walls cave in on you before you can get out of the building. At least in the case of oncoming fire, you can leave.

        • Still, anyone rebuilding in the Palisades and not using a metal roof and stucco is just asking for it.

          Sprinklers are controversial for various reasons, but not using flammable materials on the exterior is low hanging fruit.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

            Sprinklers work great for a single building fire. They stop working very quickly when the whole region is burning and there's no water pressure.

            The argument against building even more fire resistant is simple: it wouldn't have helped in a fire like this, and it's not nearly as beneficial under normal "one house on fire" conditions. There were fires similar to these as recently as 2007 or 2008, my boss at the time had to relocate all his horses and also move the offsite backups for the business because they

    • Stop.

      Over 10,000 structures have been incinerated, the average impacted homeowner is not a multi-millionaire who can just brush-off the loss of every physical possession they left in their home on Tuesday morning as the went to work.

      And what of the schools and businesses that are gone?

      Your callous dismissal of their loss is amazing.

      • I haven't heard of any homes worth less than $4 million burning. Those aren't people we need to worry about.

        Maybe it's spread into the neighborhoods where working people live, but the news only cares about rich people as far as I can tell. And I don't care about rich people as a rule. They have the resources to address these issues.

      • Oh no and think of the poor kids in Gaza, better not do anything but commiserate ever again.

    • Yeah so...it's a bit more expensive than that. However, I think that you're talking about the people's homes not the city budget. And in this instance, I would suspect that you are partially correct.

      These folks are largely the same folks that:

      1. Put through Prop 13.
      2. Demanded that modern building codes not be applied to them.
      3. Demanded low insurance rates or exemptions from insurance

      These are the same folks that have now lost everything. I feel for them, I really do...but I cannot pity them. For example,

  • Unfortunately, they built these Mcmansions and houses in middle of nature and as wooden tinderboxes (cheaper to construct). And, often all the trees and shrubbery were left right next to the houses that kinda provide kindling to getting the house burning. It's a shame, all the regulations in CA and yet they completely skipped some basic things they could do to lessen the fire risk -- eg. require more concrete/materials fire resistant, all trees and shrubbery x distance from the house etc.

    • The regulations are there for defensible space, just no enforcement.

    • Hurricanes in Florida, fires in California, tornados in Illinois.

      It's not like it's a secret that these things happen, along with approximately where they hit, the frequency, and the severity. If you don't know the risks, it's because you don't want to know.

      With fire, you can limit your exposure by building fire-resistant buildings and having a plan for bugging out with your most precious belongings well ahead of a time. If you're rich enough, you have a second home to go to, somewhere far enough away it

    • The western higher-density area of the Pacific Palisades is more of a traditional neighborhood layout on 1/8 acre lots.
  • Losing everything in a fire really is no fun at all. Many/most of the people have no insurance and they are not necessarily particularly rich either. The house may be their only big asset.

    • Even if they do have insurance, "acts of god" are usually specifically excluded from policies unless you cough up a huge premium.

      • What constitutes an 'act of god', legally?

        • What constitutes an 'act of god', legally?

          Whatever the insurance company can get away with.

          That said, it's generally something which happens in nature and not started or controlled by man [uslegal.com]. Floods, snowstorms, tornadoes, hurricanes. For a slightly more detailed description, see this [investopedia.com].

      • If these fires are found to be arson, will any insurance cover that?

        • Insurance will cover the homes lost in the fire. There's no actual reason to think they won't. There will be a raft of stories, but if you read into them they'll actually be about insurance wanting to pay less than the claimant thinks they deserve, or somebody not getting paid because they don't have a policy but thinks they should because they had a policy for 10 years up to a month ago, or companies being slow putting people in a difficult financial position in the meantime.

          • Several credible reports of widespread homeowners insurance cancellations in the affected areas. Many. I didn't yet have good reason to doubt them. Lots of people are without coverage. The blame is mostly regulatory denial of premium increases. That leads to other issues.

    • In California, the land is worth a lot more than the house, so there's that.

  • Australia vs California (Score:4, Interesting)

    by labnet ( 457441 ) on Saturday January 11, 2025 @05:37PM (#65081609)

    Australian housing roofs are 99% Steel or Tile/Concrete.
    70% of Californian roofs are flammable shingle.

    Madness!
    Most of the fires are from ember attack.
    California should look at Australian bush fire building codes. We have lots science behind the codes.

    • Insurance should demand fire resistant housing materials for any rebuilds. No exterior wood, plastic, or asphalt shingles, etc. We have the technology and most of LA has the money to redo it right.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      Are those earthquake proofs though?

    • Australian housing roofs are 99% Steel or Tile/Concrete.

      That steel and concrete would feel lovely collapsing in on you while you're laying in bed in the middle of the night during a California earthquake.

      Or maybe Australia just has an ongoing major timber shortage [sustainabl...ent.com.au] and so they have to build houses out of other things? Meanwhile in the US, forests have grown by 5% over last 30 years and now cover 304 million hectares, or 34% of the entire land area.

  • Am I the only one who thinks that guy is a shallow person?

  • ... "destroyed thousands of homes and other structures."

    So, no rich CEOs were murdered? That is good news.

    Let's remember what is important people, it's not you. So, this won't be in the news for long, and a GoFundMe won't raise the billions of dollars required to rebuild homes with individual fire suppression equipment. Also, no-one will spend trillions of dollars fixing the climate so every other building is protected.

    This is the first man-made apocalypse in the USA, it won't be the last.

  • Facts are getting in the way of the narrative ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by johnlcallaway ( 165670 ) on Sunday January 12, 2025 @07:55AM (#65082555)
    People living in wildfire prone areas are just as responsible for making sure they have insurance and a disaster plan as people living in hurricane, earthquake, tornado, and other areas. If your house burned down because of wildfires, the only one responsible is you for choosing to live in a wildfire prone are, i.e. all of southern California. When my wife and I choose to move to Florida, we picked a home that was well away from the shore and have been through 4 hurricanes without any damage. Unlike idiots that want to live near the shore. Climate change truth .. a 9 foot storm surge doesn't care about 2 inches of ocean rise. When we moved to Tennessee, we picked an area with a gentle slop on two acres with limited trees to reduce risks during wildfires and heavy rains.

    Stop blaming damage on climate change. There have been wildfires and hurricanes in these areas throughout recorded history, it only take one to destroy YOUR home. If you didn't have a plan to save your important belongings or museum pieces or you let your insurance lapse, there is no one to blame but you. (Insurance companies have to give notice, if someone didn't renew because of the cost, it's still their fault they didn't have it because they choose to live in the wildfire zone that is southern California and pay the exorbitant real estate costs.)

    We all have to live somewhere, expecting others to protect us because of our choice is simply irresponsible.

  • Several fires are burning at the same time in Los Angeles County. Not all deaths were in the Palisades fire.

    An arsonist was arrested for starting the Kenneth fire along the border between Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. That fire also killed someone. The arsonist might be facing manslaughter or murder charges.

    The Alta Dena fire has caused about the same amount of destruction as the Palisades fire.

    I believe there is at least one other major fire in the area. All of these are burning at the same time.

    Tr

Slashdot Top Deals

One has to look out for engineers -- they begin with sewing machines and end up with the atomic bomb. -- Marcel Pagnol

Close