State of Emergency in Los Angeles

I woke up early to the first ash floating down from the big fire burning up the opposite canyon faces of the fire two months ago.
The Alcade, er mayor of El A is on the teevee telling us to " avoid using your appliances because of rolling blackouts, but keep the teevee on to hear emergency updates. O.K. he's earning his salary.
I've declined 4 requests to again volunteer for livestock evacuations.They now have mandatory liability waivers after I was sued several years ago ( prospective 'showhorse' picked up a blemish when I rescued it from a burning barn.)
I walked ou with my freetrade, organic coffee for my paper.Front page proclaimes MONTECITO AND SYLMAR CONSUMED BY FIRE!
I have this perverse habit of flipping immediately to the very back page. And there, in a full page ad ' EXCLUSIVE! Single unit luxury home in exclusive canyon location! Horse facilities next to trails!
My last, visible means of support was doing the archaeologic survey for this property.I remember mumbling even a chumash wouldn't be dumb enough to crawl into this nasty piece of mostly, verticle poison oak. My 1/64th chumash monitor gave me a dirty look, slapped at a biting insect and asked if I brought lunch and propheticaly "I'd hate to be here during fire season."
I need to bug out, maybe rig the lottery, buy a 55' ketch and become a tahitian charter captain far beyond the eyes of my old outfit.
" I love L.A.!
It's just another perfect day!"

I turned on the TV when I came home last night and caught the early phase of this fire. Since it was still rather small at that point, it was easy to see when the wind-driven fire was growing. One minute, the TV helicopter pans away from a small area of flames, shows another area, then pans back a few minutes later and now that small spot fire is this huge wall of flame.

Around 11:30pm last night, probably one of the first set of houses caught on fire. It wasn't right on the line, though. That's the scary part. Some embers had blown into the interior of the neighborhood and randomly set a home on fire in the middle of the block. One, maybe two, adjacent homes quickly were on fire, flames shooting out of the windows like from a blow torch.

On the close-ups, you could see a few figures scurrying around the burning houses, silhouetted against the burning structures. There were reports at that time that some residents had becomes trapped when this pocket of fire suddenly cut them off and trapped them in their home. Haven't heard anything about them after that or this morning, so no idea if that report was accurate or what happened to them.

There seemed to be a lot of water-dropping helicopters flying last night, which seemed unusual, since nights ops are so dangerous. I guess the proximity of the fire to residential areas, the rugged terrain, and the gusting winds required the speed and flexibility of air support. Plus, the fire was pushing towards a nearby medical center.

So the fire actually did reach the Olive View Medical Center. I just saw a report from the parking area outside the hospital. Frightening story, actually.

So those winds did drive the fire from where I was watching the fire on TV last night, across a series of canyons towards the medical center around 2 am. Outlying bungalows used as office space burned down as the flames approached the main hospital. The reporter was standing next to an LA City ambulance that was totally burnt out--just an empty, black metal shell. And the roof of the main hospital actually caught on fire last night.

Apparently at least some patients were in the process of being evacuated when the main power went out. At that point, reportedly two emergency generators failed so there was no power in the hospital. I assume that only the battery-powered emergency lights, probably mostly just over the exit doors, and flashlights was all the light they had. Staff had to manually assist those patients on ventilators. The generators were eventually brought back on line, but it sounds like it took at least a couple hours to fix them. That must've been a stressful night in the hospital.

Well, some heads will probably roll over those generators, but the incident just goes to show that Murphy is on the prowl and just being in a building with multiple generator backup is no guarantee of having power when you need it the most--like in the dark hours of night with a fire raging just outside.

I heard a long time ago that generators should be cranked up every month or so. Do you think the hospitals know that? If they do, do you think they do it?

If our local Providence hospital is any indication of how most hospitals react to a disaster, it's the last place I would want to be.

And a woman I know of, who is in the hospital with terminal cancer, has just developed MRSA, compliments of doctors who can't be bothered to wash their hands.

Hospitals are no place for well people, much less sick people.

Sue

"...I heard a long time ago that generators should be cranked up every month or so..."

Any internal combustion engine should be run from time to time. You would think that the hospital maint folks would know that...

Sue,
There are other ways to get MRSA - I have community aquirred MRSA right now (confirmed by culture) along with entrococous - started the zyvox on Thursday night

I just got off the phone with my folks. They're in yorba linda, and my best friend's parents (kind of my surrogate parents) are in Brea, both of which have their own fires. My cousins are up in Sylmar, probably without a house at this point. Everyone else I know, so far, is OK.

I actually interviewed about 7 years ago at Olive View/UCLA. Kind of rustic, but I didn't think it was THAT exposed.

Regarding E-generators, I think they have to be tested monthly. When I worked in CA in an ER, we had them tested fairly frequently. The problem, of course, is that "tested" usually means they run for 10 minutes, and shut them back down. So, I wonder if Olive View's generators worked fine for the first few minutes, and eventually gave out after the normal test period ended? Maybe the regulations should be changed so that they're to be run for a longer period (24 hours?) every 1-3 months?

Anyway, it seems like half the southland is under smoke. Kind of worrisome.

I was out with my wife for a few hours this afternoon, here in south Orange county. There wasn't that much smoke visible in the distance, despite having several fires going further north of us. Can't smell any smoke in the air. However, I had to run another errand just now around 6pm and after driving for ten minutes, I realized that I could "feel" the pollution in the air in my chest. Must be all that microscopic particulate stuff wafting down this way.

Well, I may actually break out the N95 mask soon, even to wear inside the house (I have a history of asthma). After the horrible wildfires in SoCal last fall and just two N95 masks on hand to protect me through a week of heavy smoke and air pollution in my area, I stocked up on masks after that (thanks Redflare!).

Now that the sun has gone down and it's dark again, seeing these homes burn on TV--many of them rather large homes--is like watching a blast furnace running. So much flame. Wow, this fire just leap frogged through the Southland today and left a lot of people without homes who had no reason to think that they were in any dangers just this morning.

A test for what, exactly? A fire puts out a lot of stuff besides particulates. An N95 won't filter any of the gaseous fumes, so in that sense, it's no better than a wet rag. But it should trap a good portion of particulate pollution since most particles will be large enough to be stopped.

In related personal news, that tightness I felt in my chest has gone away once I spent some time indoors again, so no need for wearing a mask to bed tonight. That's good, since it's tough to keep them on when you sleep, let alone keep them from getting crushed and mussed up if you roll over onto them.

I'm pretty sure that an N95 is overkill. A regular dust mask should be fine - you're filtering pollens/dusts/allergens, not bacteria. After all, no one wears an N95 when they're doing yard work... do they?

I just ran across this LA Times article about the generator failure. I'm not sure I fully understand the difference between the two generators. I guess the one that immediately kicked in only had limited generating capacity, but it only needed to run long enough for the second one to start. The second one sounds like it could produce all the power the hospital needed, but its fuel pump failed and didn't start. And then...I guess the first generator failed, too, at that point.

The office complex I work at has two generator systems: one for the elevators, and one for lighting. Both systems are setup with automatic scheduled tests. The elevator system is run every Friday for about 2 hours. The other one comes on during a weekend once a month (I think... ), and runs for a few hours also.

We do not have anything super critical, but it's all automatic. The only time I think they are really used is during the tests, and Demand Reduction orders issued by the electric company. The power rarely goes out at our complex.

We start up the company's generators here in the Caymans on all of our properties, once a week - usually on a saturday. Standard proceedure. When/If I get a generator for the home, I will probably follow the same practice.

Although the bigger ash particles that people find coating their cars and patio furniture during wildfires is the most noticeable part of the smoke, it is the sub-micron particulates in smoke that pose a particular respiratory problem since they are so small that they can elude most of the body's normal mechanisms to capture particles in the air before they reach the deepest regions of the lungs. A dust mask won't filter down to that size level.

The superfine particulates from burning wood are also a primary reason why there's a trend to ban wood burning fireplaces in some areas, on certain winter days, when particular weather conditions would trap the smoke close to the ground, where people would inhale it.

If you're interested in reading more about the topic, this document ("Wildfire Smoke--A Guide for Public Health Officials") seems to be a standard. It was a collaborative effort by staff from different public agencies across several states that often face wildfires and you can find the document on the websites of many governmenet agencies. Looking for a link to this doc this morning, I notice that it has just been updated a few months ago. Excellent! The previous version I had was last updated back in 2001.

That's correct, N95 masks are only effective against dust/particles! Absolutely no protection against gases of any kind. It actually says so on the box if you buy a package of N95s. There is also some good information on the 3M (manufacturer's) website.

I've talked to a friend of mine, a retired firefighter with some 20 years of experience. Based on what he told me, wearing an N95 only helps against inhaling dust from collapsing buildings and the like. Of course, if that happens you'd still need decent goggles or you will be pretty much blinded by the dust. In any case, an N95 would only guarantee a fair degree of protection for a short period of time, perhaps not more than a few minutes.

If there is thick smoke even a quality military or civilian grade gas mask won't do much. It might keep you safe from toxic fumes for a while but it all depends on the filter/cartridge. Especially in an enclosed area or indoors there may not be enough oxygen left in the air in the first place so the only effective solution would be to wear your own self-contained breathing apparatus. Whether it's practical to keep one as part of your EDC kit is a different quesiton.

So in other words, it's a big crapshoot. It also makes me wonder whether buying a gas mask or respirator makes much sense at all.

I've also found this link pretty informative:
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2003-144/

P.S.: One of the few products that my friend actually recommended based on his own first hand experience was the Draeger escape hood:
http://www.unisafe.nl/PDF/Producten/Safety/Datasheet%20Draeger%20Parat%20C%20smoke%20hood.pdf

But note even a relatively expensive escape hood like that is only rated for 15 minutes.

I do. I'm increasingly bothered by the mold spores in composters and dead vegetation -- gives me mild flu-like symptoms the next day. Dust masks don't seem to help at all, but an N95 gives me a bit of protection because of the filter media and the two strap system.

Note that fit, fit, fit is critical to their effectiveness. Standard N95s don't fit me all that well -- I don't get a great seal. The (stupidly expensive) ones with the exhaust vent are much better. (I'm experimenting with stick-on weatherstripping to improve the standard N95's seal. We'll see)

Off-topic but interesting: during the SARS epidemic a few years back, surgical masks were found to be inadequate to stop the airborne spread of the virus. N95 masks were the minimum requirement.

While the N95s and similar aren't perfect, I would rather have some during fires or volcano eruptions than not. NOT having any seems to me to be worse than being exposed to ALL the debris just because I don't have $1900 piece of perfection that protects me against everything.

And when people refer to 'testing', my cynical little self wonders how they did the tests. Under likely conditions or extreme conditions?

Test: We sewed several mice into two N95s and then buried it under three feet of fine ash in a 55-gallon barrel. Said mice were removed after 30 minutes. All the mice were dead.

Test results: N95 masks don't protect against fine ash.

Cynical Sue

Well, my rational little self would think that ANY specifications should be taken with a grain of salt rather than expecting a product to perform better than the manufacturer is in fact willing to guarantee.

The N95 is guaranteed to stop "95 percent of particles that are 0.3 microns in size or larger". That's it. I'm sure it would help against inhaling dust when the air is polluted from a fire in the distance. So would wrapping a handkerchief over your mouth.

In anything remotely approaching a dangerous or life threatening situation the N95 probably won't do squat. At least little more than pressing a handkerchief over your mouth. In a 9/11 scenario when you have major buildings collapsing in clouds of dust an N95 will last how long, a couple of minutes? And this doesn't even take into account eye protection (hopefully you EDC some quality goggles) and inhaling toxic fumes. No wonder why the firefighter friend of mine nearly laughed his pants off when I brought up the subject of N95 masks for personal preparedness.

I have used N95 and similar masks quite often in the past when I was doing paint removal and other odd jobs around the house. I couldn't help but notice that even the protection against dust is mediocre at best. Grinding steel with an angle grinder for an hour or so and my nose would still be full of black gunk (makes a lot of fun blowing your nose for a few hours afterwards). I sure wouldn't want to run the same test myself standing near a big forest fire or volcanic eruption.

what other mask is best to filter out fine particulate matter in LA fire?

you guys said the N95 is useless.

The poor mice might have died from suffocation (no oxygen) rather than inhaling the ash particles. They also might have been crushed by the weight of three feet of ash.

Save the Mice!

I think that was Sue's point, more or less. Shoulda signed off as "Sarcastic Sue" this time.

Kinda reminds me of the "nazi scientist with the frog" skit from my youth. Scientist removes frogs legs one at a time, screaming and slapping the table next to frog after each amputation. On last round, frog no longer jumps when yelled at and table slapped. Conclusion: frog without legs becomes deaf.

I think many of these government funded studies work about the same way. Stuff 100 grams of splenda(or insert any other item here) down a mouse's throat 5 times a day until the mouse dies from asphyxiation, conclusion: splenda(or any other substance known to man) is bad for mice.

I'm not sure what's in the LA smoke, so as always YMMV.

For particulates, a half-mask respirator with P100 filters is the industrial-strength choice. Cartridges can be added for specific gases or a GME (gets most everything) cartridge can be used.

I am very happy with my MSA full-face respirator with P100s, FWIW, but that's because I get such a great seal with it.

Fit is everything. Not comfort fit, but a solid and reliable face seal. In industry, people go through a "fit test" with sophisticated monitoring equipment to find the size and type of respirator that really will protect them.

My two-cents' worth.

Yeah, the joke about the mice buried in ash was Sarcastic Sue speaking. I guess the mouse experiment sounded more plausible than Sue thought.

I think this discussion is confusing people. For wildfires, an N95 is decent protection. Working on "the pile" at Ground Zero day after day or being inside of a burning house full of thick smoke and poison gasses are completely different situations from simply being downwind of a wildfire. Until recently, I believe that even professional wildland firefighters rarely used more than a bandana. You see more of them using masks like Whiffs by Xcaper, but that's a fairly recent development, from what I can tell.

I didn't say useless, I said overkill.

That being said, I have no idea what wildland FF's are using. However, I think that the risks of breathing gunk in during the fires isn't too extreme. Why? Well, because of some simple "thought excercises." Smokers don't develop cancer overnight. Asbestos workers didn't get mesothelioma after their first shift. Coal miners don't get black lung in their first hours of work. What does this mean? That there is a dose/event curve. Sure, a few days of LA fires will make your snot black, and you might cough up some dark crud. Which is GOOD. That's what your body is supposed to do.

Another point here, just on the effectivness of N95's. As mentioned, they're good for filtering 95% of particulate matter, 3 microns or larger. According to my pathology book from medical school (Robbin's Pathologic Basis of Disease, 7th Ed., p 732) "The most dangerous particles range from 1 to 5 microns in diameter..." So, you only get partial protection (better than none) from a N95.

So, while it may be overkill to me, it still might be a good idea if A) you constantly live near some source of smoke, B) you have underlying lung disease, or 3) work in a profession with a prevalance towards developing lung disease. Or you smoke, in which case, you should consider the nearby fire a chance for you to save a few bucks by delaying your next pack. Stop smoking.

Actually the NIOSH definition for N95 uses a particle size of 0.3 micron or larger, not 3 microns.

Arney is correct (see my previous post). But there is more to it than that.

Now, in an ideal world the N95 is plenty good enough for filtering most harmful particles. In reality, especially if dealing with something like heavy air pollution (be it from a fire or something else) it won't last very long. The N95 is a DISPOSABLE, one-shot mask. Made of cheap materials that don't last long. What few people realize is that dust tends to be highly abrasive. It will degrade the cloth-like fiber structure quickly, clogging it at first then tearing it gradually on a micro level. All of which leaves you more and more exposed to the pollutants even though you won't know it and won't have any objective way of measuring it.

Second, the mask will degrade rapidly when in contact with sweat and body heat. Not such a big deal as long as you sit still but it becomes important if you are physically active. Moreover, strenuous activity will have a negative impact on the fit. Gaps will appear and once that happens you can forget about the 0.3 micron thing.

The N95 does what it was supposed to do pretty well but its real purpose is quite limited. Some folks seem to believe it's a quick fix for everything. Well, it's not. Also, it's called a disposable mask for a reason. Meaning that any situation that involves higher risk, longer duration exposure to irritant or harmful particles calls for a more complex and better made (and more expensive) mask.

OK, Tom and Arney are right, it is 0.3 microns.

Diddling around at 3M, apparently there are different "flavors" of N95. Interesting...

http://products3.3m.com/catalog/us/en001...ler/output_html

Haven't cruised through them all, but it appears some are designed for prolonged wear, oil vapors, etc.

As I read various local news articles after the fires, there were a few things that caught my interest. Points #2 and #3 seem to be specific to Yorba Linda.

• Even many homes with concrete roof tiles burned.
• Some fire fighting in a particular neighborhood was hampered by low/no water pressure in hydrants.
• Reverse 911 calls were too late.

I have concrete roof tiles so reading a fire captain mention that homes with concrete roofs also burned was a bit of a wake up call. Apparently the winds were strong enough to drive the embers into attic vents and under the eaves of roofs, so having a fire-resistant roof that could withstand having a burning ember land on it was less protection than expected in this situation. (Well, anytime strong Santa Ana winds blow, I suppose)

Sealing the eaves and putting fine mesh screens in the attic vents might have prevented some of the house fires. I imagine that radiant heat also set their next door neighbors' houses on fire, but I guess the point is that if you can prevent the first house from catching on fire from flying embers, then the radiant heat issue is less of a problem.

According to the water district, flames had destroyed a sensor somewhere which prevented them from detecting the loss of pressure. The fire fighting teams in that instance had to pull back from the hilltop areas to a lower elevation to find hydrants with enough pressure and make their stand there.

The reverse 911 problem seems to have been a human problem. It's not that the system wasn't functioning, it's because no one requested that the system be activated early enough. Someone quoted in one article says that the protocol to activate the system wasn't finalized when the fires hit. Some homes in the Yorba Linda area had already burned by the times the calls went out, and fire fighters had trouble speeding to the fire as panicked residents were told to evacuate at the last minute and were clogging the roads. I don't think my city has adopted a reverse 911 system yet, but this story is a bit worrying. As if often the case, it's the human factor that makes or breaks the system.

As someone that grew up in Yorba Linda (or, "Yuppie Linda" as we called it in high school), I can understand the road clogging. Essentiall YL is built upon a hill. YL Blvd is the "upper" main highway, and Orangethorpe/Esperanza is the "lower" main road. They run East/west. All the residential streets run up or down hill (that'd be north or south) off these 2 thoroughfaires. Truth be told, they're both only 2 lanes on either side. So it's very easy to see how the residential road would clog quickly, and the main highways even quicker. To make matters worse, YL Blvd is divided with concrete islands. It's also the road closer to the hill crests, that were burning.

Seems that reverse 911 could have helped if it'd be set quicker. But it also just might be poor planning in setting up the city for an evacuation.

I'll see if I can set up some pics from my parents and friends later.

Now Round Two Begins-

Rains Start today, mud slides predicted..

I just learned a new term while reading a news article about the preps for the coming rain--post-fire hydrophobic soil. I haven't seen a more scientific explanation of exactly how this occurs, but apparently the soil becomes resistant to absorbing moisture, so it runs off at greater volume than it would if it rained on normal, bare soil. That would certainly explain why authorities are always particularly worried about burned areas when it rains.

I'm wondering if the very top layer of soil turns into a water-resistant crust due to the heat? Until erosion or plants breaking through come along, the crust remains intact. I don't know, just conjecture on my part. Anyone know how the soil becomes less absorbent after a fire?

Arney..check out JohnMcPhee's book "the control of nature" the chapter "LA against the mountains" explains the entire process.
for someone on the Midwest it was real eye opener..i had no idea that there were huge catch basins built to catch landslides.

after the fires here in our area i read that the top layer of the soil becomes almost 'glazed'.

am trying to find the reference for you.

ah yes, the term is "hydrophobic".

go here:

scroll down to the bottom of the page to "soil erosion control after wildfire." a link to a pdf that explains hydrophobic soil in detail.

Thanks Canoedogs and bsmith for the info.

So far, after the first night of rains, looks like the burn areas have been spared of any mudslides. I was just reading that the voluntary evacuations had turned into mandatory evacuations in some places last night.