SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In the Canadian province of Alberta, 80,000 people have been ordered to evacuate the Fort McMurray area, where a wildfire has burned 1,600 buildings and more than 10,000 hectares (about 24,700 acres). The cause of the fire is unknown, but "very high temperatures, low relative humidities and some strong winds" are said to favor its spread.
Coverage:
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
80,000 Evacuated Ahead of Alberta Fire
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 32 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Sin has many tools, but a lie is the handle which fits them all.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday May 05 2016, @01:50PM
It's very early for the usual forest fires in the West. It wouldn't be surprising if arson or accidental ignition were to blame. There was a recent case [nydailynews.com] in California where a woman set a bunch of forest fires. She did set them in the summer, though, to mask their cause.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05 2016, @02:00PM
El nino has made canada warmer and much drier this year.
(Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Thursday May 05 2016, @02:24PM
Gotta feel bad for Alberta in the last few years. I'm sure it was only two years ago they had massive flooding and I'm sure last year they had issues with fires as well.
Top that with oil prices dropping, investors are pulling out of the oil sands so now they have a ton of infrastructure to maintain, less money coming in and most of their workers (who weren't originally from Alberta) are moving back to where they came from. Exact same sort of economic stuff happened back in the 80's when oil prices were high.
"Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday May 05 2016, @02:51PM
Top that with oil prices dropping, investors are pulling out of the oil sands so now they have a ton of infrastructure to maintain, less money coming in and most of their workers (who weren't originally from Alberta) are moving back to where they came from. Exact same sort of economic stuff happened back in the 80's when oil prices were high.
What's different from the 80s is that this is expected. Anyone who has been in the industry for more than a few years already has survived one or more such downturns. The moment prices come back up to a profitable level, they'll resume production.
(Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Thursday May 05 2016, @03:18PM
Yeah, I'd expect that, but it could be 10 to 15 to even 20 years. I mean there was a bust on oil prices in the 80's and prices didn't spike, to the point the oil sands became profitable again, until the early 00's. I think a big issue for them is as oil becomes less important, because of alternative sources and decreased usage, it's just not going to be worth sucking it out of sand. As soon as electric vehicles become a viable norm, which I expect in the next 10-20 years, oil demand will drop like a stone.
I expect coal to become more popular though as more power plants are built to meet an increase in demand for electricity. It's cheaper than building nuclear plants and has far less restrictions on it. I think wind, tidal and solar will be good supplements, but I don't think they'll be able to meet primary demand in the short term without some significant advances. More for logistic reasons than anything, they just require too much land coverage and too much maintenance, spread out over that huge land coverage, compared to just digging up black rocks and tossing them in a fire.
"Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
(Score: 2) by RedGreen on Thursday May 05 2016, @07:08PM
Must not be following the recent trends though they have plenty of coal as well, more than oil I do believe, the tide is against a new coal plant being built in North America let alone there where they are shutting theirs down. Natural gas again which they have plenty of is the new low cost electrical production method in favour at the moment. They have a good deal of wind resource which they are starting to take advantage of and the southern part of the province is the best place in Canada for solar again starting to take off. Your electric car fantasy is just that at 10 million cars a year production it will take ~40 years to replace all the gas powered vehicles on the road at the moment in Canada and the US and that is nowhere near happening. Some time in a century or so it may get done hell in about 20-30 years electric may be half the production on a yearly basis but they are definitely going to have to sort out a better electrical grid in that time to get it done too....
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday May 05 2016, @09:46PM
Yeah, I'd expect that, but it could be 10 to 15 to even 20 years. I mean there was a bust on oil prices in the 80's and prices didn't spike, to the point the oil sands became profitable again, until the early 00's.
I think it won't take that long. First, where's the cheap oil coming from now? My take is competing OPEC members who are rapidly depleting their cheaper reserves. Second, why is oil cheap now? Because a few countries, particularly, China, are temporarily cutting back on demand.
As soon as electric vehicles become a viable norm, which I expect in the next 10-20 years, oil demand will drop like a stone.
Won't happen. Cheap oil is the primary obstruction to electric vehicle adoption (I would rank it over infrastructure support). Electric vehicles just aren't viable until oil remains expensive to the vehicle owners either by taxation/penalties or reduced supply. OR the cost of electricity and electric vehicles drop through the floor (which means that oil may be cheap, but it would be relatively expensive compared to the electric vehicle alternative).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 06 2016, @12:25AM
two years ago they had massive flooding
[...]last year they had issues with fires as well.
Top that with oil prices dropping
There are certain groups who would be quick to point out that, in 2015, Alberta (which had had a Right Wing gov't for decades) voted in a Liberal gov't. ;-)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday May 06 2016, @06:14AM
Actually they voted in a NDP government, socialist, as the right wingers had mismanaged the Provinces finances so badly. At one time Alberta had a $5 Billion rainy day fund and now due to tax cuts (conservatives always seem to cut taxes when things are good lately rather then considering that downturns are a regular thing) they have such a huge deficit that the socialists looked like an improvement.
This fire is going to cost a fortune with currently a projected $9 billion insurance payout, makes the Slave Lake fire of a couple of years back look small.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 06 2016, @09:35PM
Ah, someone else here who uses words he doesn't understand.
The New Democratic Party doesn't even put "Socialist" in their name.
Let's see if some -actual- Socialists ever use the S word in describing NDP.
So, no. What NDP is is Social Democrats of the Franklin Roosevelt|Lyndon Johnson type--just as their name indicates.
the socialists
It would be a good idea for you to become better informed.
Look up Eugene Debs [counterpunch.org] and the platform of the Socialist Party in e.g. 1936 to see what actual Socialists look like. [google.com]
Prepare to be shocked; they are about THE COLLECTIVE OWNERSHIP OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION.
conservatives always seem to cut taxes when things are good
Now, that part you got right--except that you're talking about RADICALS who have mislabeled themselves.
An -actual- Conservative recognizes that that tack is counter to what Ike's Federal Reserve Chairman said was the right thing to do in good times. [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Gravis on Thursday May 05 2016, @02:21PM
yes but she didn't cause any of the large fires.
humans are wierd.
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Thursday May 05 2016, @02:37PM
Damn dendrophobics. Why can't we all just get along. It's not like trees chose to be trees, they were born that way!