LA Fires: Jan 2025

[Tony Crocker]

We know California has always been notorious for precipitation volatility, particularly here in the south. I’ve seen several papers showing that’s likely to increase in a warming world along with becoming more concentrated in mid winter (thus leading to dryer starts to more overlap with peak Santa Ana season). I’m curious what Tony’s data has to say.

I'm always suspicious of the "climate change causes more volatility" arguments. Part of this is because my snowfall data shows absolutely zero change in volatility over the years dating back to the 1970's. The other part is that in places like SoCal where natural volatility is so high anyway, it can take a very long time for any true trend to be discerned.

As far as dry starts are concerned, SoCal vegetation always dries out. Average L.A. rainfall is .30 inch in May, .36 inch in June-September combined and .51 in October. That's why many of our worst fire seasons have ensued after wet winters that create more fuel. I recall 1978 and 1993 specifically.

What about extension of dry weather into the winter? The wetter months December to March all have at least 30% probability of less than one inch of rain in weather records going back to 1877.

Here's some volatility for you. Recall my May 2020 hike to Hoegee's Camp:

1953-54 had zero rain in L.A. until 1.11 inches in November, but then only 0.08 inch in December before the Monrovia Peak Fire started Dec. 28.

As for that March 1964 Verdugo Hills Fire, L.A. had zero rain in December and February and only 1.43 inches in January.

During the first season I was learning to ski, January 1976 was one of only 5 Januaries with zero L.A. rain.

As for any trend in volatility, here's the L.A. rainfall data in 25-year increments:

	Avg​	St. Dev.​
1877-1900	15.68​	8.52​
1900-1925	14.62​	4.57​
1925-1950	15.17​	5.77​
1950-1975	13.86​	6.48​
1975-2000	16.17​	8.33​
2000-2024	13.68​	8.35​
Total	14.86​	7.04​

I compiled that data working backwards and it looked like volatility increased after 1975, but then you see the 19th century numbers which make it hard to draw any conclusion.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

26 inches! That's the rain variant of Mount Washington's 231 mph wind gust.

 

[socal]

Santa Ana wind description from that 1961 LAFD report:

I've read variations of this description many places. The continental air needs to be colder than in the coastal regions for the Santa Ana winds to develop. Southwest summer "heat dome" events can push into the SoCal coastal plains but are not accompanied by the offshore winds. Santa Anas are historically a fall/winter phenomenon and my gut feeling from living here 60+ years is that they are less frequent than when I was growing up. That's because we remember best the September/October Santa Anas that drive temperatures over 100F more than the winter ones that only get into the 80's.

A few years ago I found a dataset of the record high and low tempertures for every date of the year. How many dates does Los Angeles have a record low of 80F or higher and when are they? There are 13 dates, 12 in September and one in October. This is to me a clear cut Santa Ana marker because there are zero such dates in July and August. It is well known that summer tempertures in continental North America have risen disproportionately with global warming. Of those 13 dates with lows 80+F, the last one was in 1988. So I believe that September is now usually too warm in the Utah/Nevada high pressure formation area of Santa Anas for them to develop, just as July and August always have been.

IMHO the "climate change component" of Santa Ana winds is a reduced risk factor for destructive fires because the Santa Anas are more confined to cooler months than historically.

I'm always suspicious of the "climate change causes more volatility" arguments. Part of this is because my snowfall data shows absolutely zero change in volatility over the years dating back to the 1970's. The other part is that in places like SoCal where natural volatility is so high anyway, it can take a very long time for any true trend to be discerned.

As far as dry starts are concerned, SoCal vegetation always dries out. Average L.A. rainfall is .30 inch in May, .36 inch in June-September combined and .51 in October. That's why many of our worst fire seasons have ensued after wet winters that create more fuel. I recall 1978 and 1993 specifically.

What about extension of dry weather into the winter? The wetter months December to March all have at least 30% probability of less than one inch of rain in weather records going back to 1877.

Here's some volatility for you. Recall my May 2020 hike to Hoegee's Camp:

1953-54 had zero rain in L.A. until 1.11 inches in November, but then only 0.08 inch in December before the Monrovia Peak Fire started Dec. 28.

As for that March 1964 Verdugo Hills Fire, L.A. had zero rain in December and February and only 1.43 inches in January.

During the first season I was learning to ski, January 1976 was one of only 5 Januaries with zero L.A. rain.

As for any trend in volatility, here's the L.A. rainfall data in 25-year increments:

	Avg​	St. Dev.​
1877-1900	15.68​	8.52​
1900-1925	14.62​	4.57​
1925-1950	15.17​	5.77​
1950-1975	13.86​	6.48​
1975-2000	16.17​	8.33​
2000-2024	13.68​	8.35​
Total	14.86​	7.04​

I compiled that data working backwards and it looked like volatility increased after 1975, but then you see the 19th century numbers which make it hard to draw any conclusion.

My point in all of this, as a Santa Monica Mountains resident for 10+ years and being through several fires is that they weren’t prepared, so we will never know if it would have been a bad fire that burned some houses or the catastrophic fire it was.

Saying the winds on Tuesday make it irrelevant what they had at their disposal is just wrong. Helicopters and super scoopers were flying on Tuesday, that means that it’s possible they could have had larger tankers available. The big DC10s were mothballed in the desert for their season so it took them two days before even one could Be there.

They sent out emails urging residents to prepare at least 5 days before the event, what did they do? It was widely known that it was going to be a bad storm, could someone have paid to have them prep equipment, it’s a short flight if the planes were ready, which they weren’t.

Also, I have literally watched the response from the hillside, taking photos. They were underprepared even on Thursday, and last night they again lost control and had to call in additional resources. Today they finally did what was needed, there were at least 3 very large tankers and probably 7 large tankers in addition to all new helicopters that hadn’t flown until today. They almost let the fire destroy all of upper Brentwood, on the 4th day after the fire started.

This isn’t partisan, the people who were in charge may or may not have saved 1000s of homes, but it’s clear they did nothing to actually prepare and were hoping to get lucky. The head of the fire department said the city let them down, these are just facts.

I’ll lighten it up a bit and share some really cool photos I took. I’ve stood on the hillside and watched this whole thing unfold, they failed us.

 

[Tony Crocker]

Well over half of the time when there are Santa Ana wind warnings we get nothing. But the really big ones like last Tuesday blow everywhere.

The are certain corridors that Santa Anas hit more frequently. One of those is Malibu. For those who think SoCal fires are more common recently,

Saying the winds on Tuesday make it irrelevant what they had at their disposal is just wrong. Helicopters and super scoopers were flying on Tuesday

In the very same L.A. Times that made the assertion of no-fly Tuesday was an article on the Getty Villa which mentioned that at noon Tuesday

An aerial crew dropped water over the Villa's ranch house.

It was widely known that it was going to be a bad storm

Yes. On Tuesday when we left for Mammoth, the lead story in the paper (deadline mid-afternoon Monday afternoon) was how severe the wind would be. It was compared to late November 2011. That wind event uprooted hundreds of old growth trees in Altadena/Pasadena, which is an area where the winds are not normally strong. There were no fires that time mainly because it had rained 2.75 inches in October/November.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

last big fire to hit such a premium SoCal residential area was Bel Air 1961. Detail LAFD report here very much brings a deja vu aspect to the current situation in Pacific Palisades.

 

[Tony Crocker]

(thus leading to dryer starts to more overlap with peak Santa Ana season). I’m curious what Tony’s data has to say.

The driest starts:
1878-79: 0.14 through November
1890-91: 0.25 through November
1891-92: 0.06 through November
1898-99: 0.30 through December
1903-04: 0.57 through January
1912-13: 0.94 through December
1917-18: 0.93 through January
1929-30: 0.32 through December, all of that in September
1932-33: 0.22 through November
1933-34: 0.39 through November
1937-38: 0.01 through November
1938-39: 0.02 through November
1943-44: 0.23 through November
1947-48: 0.30 through November
1948-49: 0.09 through November
1956-57: 0.56 through December
1958-59: 0.52 through December
1959-60: 0.08 through November
1960-61: 0.01 through October, Bel Air Fire started November 6
1962-63: 0.12 through December, 0.64 through January
1971-72: 0.34 through November
1975-76: 0.59 through January, first season I tried skiing
1980-81: 0.00 through November, 0.85 through December
1990-91: 0.21 through December, 1.38 through January
1995-96: 0.11 through November
1999-2000: 0.84 through December
2006-07: 1.43 through January, record low 3.14 for season, Griffith Park Fire in May
2013-14: 0.97 through December
2017-18: 0.19 through December
2020-21: 0.11 through November
2024-25: 0.16 through December

So, combined with prior data:

	Avg​	St. Dev.​	dry>Nov	dry>Dec	dry>Jan
1877-1900	15.68​	8.52​	3​	1​	0​
1900-1925	14.62​	4.57​	0​	1​	2​
1925-1950	15.17​	5.77​	7​	1​	0​
1950-1975	13.86​	6.48​	2​	3​	0​
1975-2000	16.17​	8.33​	1​	2​	2​
2000-2024	13.68​	8.35​	1​	3​	1​
Total	14.86​	7.04​	10%​	7%​	3%​

What the last 3 columns mean:
3% of seasons start with <1.5 inch rain through end of January.
7% of seasons start with <1.0 inch rain through end of December but more than 1.5 by end of January
10% of seasons start with <0.5 inch rain through end of November but more than 1.0 by end of December

I don't see much trend in the dry early seasons. If there is, in terms of fire risk it's surely offset by the retreat of Santa Ana events from September. October is by far the most destructive fire month, includes almost half of those Malibu fires, plus the two largest (Cedar 2003 and Witch 2007) in San Diego, and also Oakland Hills 1991 and Tubbs (Napa/Sonoma) in 2017.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

Fascinating to see that NYC isn't the only major city with a mayor who enjoys extensive foreign travel on the public dime. Whether the Ghana visit had any real effect on the fire-fighting response or not, the media will continue having a field day -- at least until the end of the current news cycle.

 

[Tony Crocker]

Any opinions about where to assign blame other than the Santa Anas

In terms of weather, it's mostly the the Santa Anas and somewhat that the rainy season has not started yet in SoCal. October is the most likely time for those conditions can be met but it has happened later before as in late Dec. 1953.

Strangely I had seen nothing online about the origin of either Palisades or Eaton fire. I occasionally browse the Cliff Mass Weather Blog for insights into Northwest weather. Cliff has opined before on Santa Ana/Diablo winds as feature of climate, notably with respect to the Tubbs and Camp Fire in NorCal in 2017 and 2018.

Like the L.A. Times, Cliff warned on January 6 that the level of Santa Ana winds would be historically extreme. Yesterday he presented strong evidence that both Palisades and Eaton were caused by power line issues. In both articles he opined that utilities should not be shy about shutting down power in response to weather forecasts like on Jan. 6.

The Jan. 6 post has a map of extensive preemptive outages planned by SCE. But the Eaton Canyon lines are high voltage. I wonder if those are more difficult to de-energize? The power lines in the Palisades origin area are conventional lines on wooden poles and probably belong to LADWP.

 

[socal]

Interesting links you had. My wife’s family life’s literally a few hundred yards below the start of the Palisades fire, I’ll take a look to see if I can see power lines up there.

It was always odd to me they’d shut off the SoCal Edison customers but us DWP people living in the hills didn’t lose power.

 

[socal]

Interesting links you had. My wife’s family life’s literally a few hundred yards below the start of the Palisades fire, I’ll take a look to see if I can see power lines up there.

It was always odd to me they’d shut off the SoCal Edison customers but us DWP people living in the hills didn’t lose power.

And a few more shots from today from my neighbors house. There was no fire out there today but they were just wetting hot spots around Mandeville Canyon

 

[Tony Crocker]

TV news tonight interviewed homeowners on Altadena Dr. who shot video of the fire starting in Eaton Canyon under one of the high voltage towers. SCE claims their power lines were de-energized. FYI Pasadena has a municipal utility, but I'm fairly sure the Eaton Canyon high voltage are SCE.

It was always odd to me they’d shut off the SoCal Edison customers but us DWP people living in the hills didn’t lose power.

The huge liability in Northern California from PG&E live power lines sparking fires in 2017 and 2018 surely got the attention of SCE, though I suspect SCE is a bit more attuned to fire risk because SoCal has had it forever. But maybe LADWP didn't get the memo from those 2017 and 2018 fires.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

The huge liability in Northern California from PG&E live power lines sparking fires in 2017 and 2018

One of the many things that leave Europeans, especially Germans and Dutch, slack-jawed during visits to the U.S. is the high incidence of old-school power lines throughout our country. I'm aware of the cons of burying them (initial cost, access for maintenance and repairs, etc.); however, it would seem to be a valuable idea for places like SoCal given the possibility of them starting a fire (also happened in the recent Hawaii disaster?). Any idea if it's under serious consideration?

 

[Tony Crocker]

I'm aware of the cons of burying them

Like many things, retrofitting is far more expensive than burying during initial development.

places like SoCal

Underground might be more difficult to repair after an earthquake.

Nonetheless I would agree that in some high risk areas it makes sense to bury power lines.

The Eaton Canyon homeowner videos were a topic in L.A. Times today. SCE said their regular lines were de-energized before the fire broke out. The high voltage were energized but SCE claimed no anomalies were detected. Investigation is underway; no one else is allowed into that sector of lower Eaton Canyon.

The cause of Palisades is still being speculated. A fire from fireworks New Year's Eve was extinguished but some have guessed not completely before the winds started. No one else has picked up on the satellite images Cliff Mass showed near a DWP utility pole. L.A. Times said that LADWP generally does not de-energize distribution power lines like SCE did.

 

[EMSC]

in some high risk areas it makes sense to bury power lines.

Especially the neighborhood sized ones. OTOH Primary sized (eg high tension) lines are ridiculously expensive to bury. Buried lines are entirely different engineered and types of both wire and insulation than above ground.

 

[Tony Crocker]

We had a couple of errands in Eagle Rock and Pasadena today, so we then took an exploratory drive. View toward Mt. Wilson from the 134 Freeway:

The Eaton Fire got up to those transmission towers, did not damage them but knocked out power for few that then ran on backup generators.

Woodbury Drive is the border with police and National Guard barricades, marked black in the map below.

In one spot there were a couple of houses burned on the north side of Woodbury.

The 24 Hour Fitness gym where I go for yoga is undamaged a block west of here but probably not open for awhile.

For an overview we drove up to the La Canada mesa behind JPL. On the map our viewpoint is marked with a black X at lower left. The approximate fire perimeter is outlined in red with a red X at the origin point. Soon after we arrived a helicopter laid down some retardant.

Firefighters blocked the fire from moving west of Lincoln Ave., so the Canyon Crest homes in foreground have no damage.

A wide angle view in the same direction:

Across the center of this picture you can see a faded pink hue from another retardant line. The Arroyo Seco is directly below us. The highest background mountain at upper left is at the top of Eaton Canyon and looks burned.

View across hills above Altadena:

The newish development at center is at the top of Lincoln and also undamaged.

A zoom of the ridgeline behind the right side of it is charred and it's hard to tell what's beyond that because the trees don't look unusual from our distance.

But this zoom more directly east is different.

The trees still hide the devastation from view but these trees are all gray from ash or partial burning.

The retardant helicopter made another pass.

The fire road on the ridgeline behind the helicopter is freshly bulldozed as a firebreak according to a Cal Fire guy who came by our viewpoint.

Then it flew directly over us.

We saw a different helicopter load water from the top of JPL.

There was no smoke or fire visible while we were there. The Cal Fire guy said the ground is still hot and that the predicted wind tonight and tomorrow could stir something up. So they are preparing these perimeters just in case.

 

[EMSC]

Soon after we arrived a helicopter laid down some retardant.

The fairly well known S-64 sky crane.

Only around 100 built so far, with a fraction of that amount in service.

Having been essentially offgrid for a while didn't realize how close to JPL it was.

 

[socal]

The fairly well known S-64 sky crane.

Only around 100 built so far, with a fraction of that amount in service.

Having been essentially offgrid for a while didn't realize how close to JPL it was.

I’ve seen these at all the fires in the past 10 years, oddly they didn’t arrive until Thursday, fire started Tuesday. They fly dozens of times to the Stone Canyon reservoir behind us, makes our house shake.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

To non-LAers, the naming of individual fires over the decades is sometimes mysterious, such as the new Auto Fire; however, I googled and it's from "Auto Center Drive" in Ventura, so not odd.

Kinda fascinating how the entire region is, counter-intuitively, reporting good to moderately good air quality (from the airnow.gov graphic below) — I assume due to the winds pushing the smoke directly toward the ocean? Whenever I see pix or clips of firefighters, none are wearing any kind of breathing protection, not even an N95 mask, probably because they're uncomfortable when doing that type of brutal work. That can't be good for their lungs. I hope they're paid well (unfortunately, not the case in all likelihood) and covered by bulletproof health insurance.

 

[EMSC]

the entire region is, counter-intuitively, reporting good to moderately good air quality

I suspect there is little active fire at this point based on Tony's pics.

I’ve seen these at all the fires in the past 10 years

I think Cal Fire owns 2 or 3 of those so not a surprise. Saw one assisting a Colo fire in 2023. They have an iconic functional design. So highly recognizeable despite there being only handfuls of them in existence.

 

[socal]

Frustated over here just east of the 405. School remains closed due to us being in an evacuation warning area but no fire and per the briefing this morning they have good control on the eastern end of the fire and just continuing hand work and just checking behind houses that didn't burn in the canyon. I honestly think they just forgot about us. We are on week 5 of winter break from school, even my son is asking when he gets to go back to school. All other LA schools not directly impacted are open, except one other in a similar situation in Encino. Frustrating.