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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
NASA Space

NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab Closed Due to Raging LA Fires (space.com) 69

Posted by BeauHD from the scary-times dept.
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), located at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains just north of Los Angeles, has been temporarily shuttered due to the nearby Eaton fire. "JPL is closed except for emergency personnel. No fire damage so far (some wind damage) but it is very close to the lab. Hundreds of JPLers have been evacuated from their homes & many have lost homes. Special thx to our emergency crews. Pls keep us in your thoughts & stay safe," JPL Director Laurie Leshin announced via X today (Jan. 8). Space.com reports: JPL is federally funded but managed by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. The center runs many of NASA's high-profile robotic missions, such as the Perseverance and Curiosity Mars rovers and the $5 billion Europa Clipper, which recently launched to explore an intriguing ocean moon of Jupiter.

The Eaton fire sparked up on Tuesday evening (Jan. 7) near Altadena, which is just north of Pasadena. It has burned at least 1,000 acres (400 hectares) to date, according to CBS News, which cited the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). The Eaton fire is one of several big blazes churning through the Los Angeles area, driven and spread by record-setting winds. The biggest and most destructive is the Palisades Fire, which is laying waste to the Pacific Palisades neighborhood on the west side of the city.

NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab Closed Due to Raging LA Fires More | Reply

NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab Closed Due to Raging LA Fires

Comments Filter:

  • Prevention (Score:3)

    by cowdung ( 702933 ) on Thursday January 09, 2025 @04:34AM (#65074661)

    These fires are just insane.

    Are there no barriers that can be built to stop their rapid propagation?
    Firewalls?
    Trenches?
    Artificial rivers?

    Now that so much has been destroyed can it be rebuilt so that this doesn't happen again?

    • Re:Prevention (Score:5, Insightful)

      by beelsebob ( 529313 ) on Thursday January 09, 2025 @04:51AM (#65074679)

      No. The problem with these very large fires is the wind. Embers from them blow downwind by miles, and spread the fire sometimes as fast as 15mph. Tiny little trenches (even ones hundreds of meters wide) don't stop them. They can jump across them easily.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by CEC-P ( 10248912 )
        No, it's lack of water to put them out and PG&E running power lines through forests without clearing X amount of feet away from them because it's cheaper.

        • Well no, it's the winds. The water and the budget cuts are just media fodder. The winds have been so bad, there is almost nothing to do but try and contain the files.
            Also PG&E doesn't operate in that part of California. So that shows how much you know.

          • Well no, it's the winds. The water and the budget cuts are just media fodder. The winds have been so bad, there is almost nothing to do but try and contain the files.

            You are both mistaken, it's not wind, it's not water, ... it's fuel mitigation. The fuel is nowadays allowed to accumulate. No more removal, no more controlled burns.

            FYI - The winds are nothing new. They are massive every year. Overturned big rig trucks on the 60 freeway are an annual occurrence during the Santa Ana's for example. They were, in part, the motivation for fuel mitigation. Everyone knew they were coming and would make fire fighting impossible IF there was abundant fuel.

            Now, radicals preve

            • Now, radicals prevent removal and controlled burns. Requiring environmental studies and other paper barriers.

              No it's not and you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Just STFU with this idiotic right-wing talking point.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by drnb ( 2434720 )

                Now, radicals prevent removal and controlled burns. Requiring environmental studies and other paper barriers.

                No it's not and you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Just STFU with this idiotic right-wing talking point.

                LOL. So inconvenient truths are "right-wing"?

                "The reason California hasn't conducted more of these controlled burnings comes down to existing environmental laws in the U.S. that have posed bureaucratic obstacles to prescribed fires. It often takes years for proposals to go through reviews before any controlled burning can actually take place"
                https://www.newsweek.com/contr... [newsweek.com]

                The sanitized spin from the CA gov:

                "Prescribed burning takes place after careful planning and under controlled conditions.

                • If you think that "prescribed burning" would have prevented this then you're an even bigger idiot than your last comment indicated. Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. So just sit the fuck down and shut up. You are helping no one.

                  • If you think that "prescribed burning" would have prevented this ...

                    No, that's just your ignorance speaking. Its about smaller fires where homes and businesses can be better protected vs larger fires where homes and businesses cannot be saved.

                    .... then you're an even bigger idiot than your last comment indicated.

                    My last comment gave you documentation that bureaucrats were effectively preventing controlled burns.

                    ... Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. So just sit the fuck down and shut up. You are helping no one.

                    No, you are speaking from ignorance. Put your political blinders aside and face the science.

                    The fuel was going to burn, one way or the other, unless physically

                    • I don't give a fuck what you say. You're nobody on a niche website who's repeating the right-wing talking points throwing blame around and causing unwanted drama.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by PPH ( 736903 )

          running power lines through forests

          That's more of a Northern California problem.

          Does anyone know how these fires were started? Not the "blowing embers" b.s. Because embers have to come from somewhere. Even a homeless camp meth cooking operation.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            Does anyone know how these fires were started? Not the "blowing embers" b.s. Because embers have to come from somewhere. Even a homeless camp meth cooking operation.

            No one knows because everyone who can figure it out is busy fighting the fires.

            But there are two main causes - natural and human. Natural causes typically are ones like lightning. Human causes are much more varied and can range from failing infrastructure (power lines), to human activities like campfires or other fires. Another cause is engine e

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by drnb ( 2434720 )

            Because embers have to come from somewhere. Even a homeless camp meth cooking operation.

            I've been hiking and camping in remote areas north of LA. In the dry seasons you can pick up a piece of dead wood and see and feel how ready to combust it is if you have any experience creating campfires (which you would not do under those conditions, stoves only). It's scary seeing how ready a whole hillside is ready to burn. Minor sparks could ignite something. When its like that its time to take the dirt bikes out the the desert. Pretty much anything that can create a spark is dangerous.

      • By having a goal of zero fires, when the big one hits there is so much undergrowth everywhere that there is no stopping it. This is still a case of poor land management. At least no earthquakes have gotten in the way..

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          By having a goal of zero fires, when the big one hits there is so much undergrowth everywhere that there is no stopping it. This is still a case of poor land management. At least no earthquakes have gotten in the way..

          Which is why the prevailing wildfire treatment is as long as the fires are isolated, to let them burn. Just because a fire pops up doesn't mean we have to put it out - instead let them burn and only attack when they get close to human settlements

          You can bet a lot of this fire is simply being l

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by sg_oneill ( 159032 )

      Not a lot. Once a fire is big enough theres sweet FA except a very good fire department that can slow it down.

      The good news is that the three best fire departments in the world are the Aussies, Canadians and importantly here, the Californians. If it was in summer, you might even have a a few of those aussies (who are the masters of fighting highly explosive eucalypt fires which are similar in behavior to redwood fires), alas its not summer and the australians are back at home fighting big fires back in AU.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Retired Chemist ( 5039029 )
      Perhaps we should not have built a gigantic city in the middle of a desert?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ksw_92 ( 5249207 )

        We're talking about LA, not Las Vegas. The greater LA area is comprised of several climate types that are mostly variants of the Mediterranean type.

        • It is still mostly desert. Not the Sahara or the Sonoran Desert, but desert. They import most of their water from the mountains and when the supply runs out, it runs out.

  • Thankfully... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CEC-P ( 10248912 ) on Thursday January 09, 2025 @08:52AM (#65074995)
    The smelt are okay! Those poor fish! I don't know what I'd do if anything happened to them. We better keep rerouting water to them instead of humans and not build a simple dam to stop the saltwater from coming inland.

    • I believe that fish are also affected by wildfires...

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by timere969 ( 2833731 )
      You have no idea what you are talking about. The Bay Delta region is predominantly freshwater and there are hundreds of dikes and dams through the area. The controlling factor for how much water goes to Southern California is called the State Water Project and that is dependent on snow melt from the Sierra Nevada mountains to the east. No snow, no flow. No rain, no snow. Because of a normal snow pack during last year, Southern California is expected to have most of it's allotment from the State Water Projec

Slashdot Top Deals

To restore a sense of reality, I think Walt Disney should have a Hardluckland. -- Jack Paar

Close