‘A Riskier Place to Live’: Canada Could Be Uninsurable in a Decade

[rcjordan]

https://www.theenergymix.com/a-riskier-place-to-live-canada-could-be-uninsurable-in-a-decade-says-expert/

[ergophobe]

RE this, the parallel thread on Hawaii and the ongoing threads on California and Florida...

This just simply isn't possible in the short term. What's happening now is that building codes, including surrounding areas, were designed for a different environment. Some of the housing stock can be upgraded quickly. In fire-prone areas, for example, you could potentially mandate fines for having combustible materials within 10m of a building (and yes, that means trees). But there's not a lot you can do short-term about a flood plain.

Many people who study the fire problem point out that for much of the history of civilization, cities burned of their own accord quite often (i.e. without the help of massive aerial firebombing). Now they don't. This is primarily the result of building codes. What we have not done is reworked building codes for bigger wildfires and deeper floods. My guess is that in the same way that it too centuries to upgrade to the generally fire-resistant urban areas we have now, it will take losing most of the current housing stock and replacing it under new standards to "fix" this problem.

And, yes, I know that in theory Los Angeles is "urban" but most places that are burning are low-density places with lots and lots of vegetation between and commonly right up to and touching houses.

So Los Angeles has a window to update building codes before these houses get rebuilt to stipulate what materials are acceptable and how much non-combustible space needs to surround each house.

And some places should simply not get rebuilt. I believe that if my neighborhood burned down, we should probably not be allowed to rebuild here. But if you apply that standard everywhere there are houses, housing stock in California collapses. So the next best thing is rigorous building codes and rigorous enforcement of defensible space around homes.

My read is that people are still not willing to accept those things.

I've seen a lot of progress. When I first started giving talks about fire ecology in 2011, I was shocked that even most Californians had absolutely no clue. They believed then essentially what Trump believes now - that you can, you know, "rake the forests" and "manage" things, but that just misses the point.

Even now, I hear a lot of people talk about how we need more "controlled" burns. I don't know any fire person who uses that language. They like to say, "There is no such thing as a controlled fire" so they use the term "prescribed" burn or "management fire." A friend of mine lost his house in a prescribed burn that was most definitely not a controlled burn