Connect with us

California

California wildfires: How and why did fire hydrants run dry across Los Angeles?

Published

on

California wildfires: How and why did fire hydrants run dry across Los Angeles?


As Los Angeles battles multiple fast-moving wildfires, emergency officials have faced a nightmare situation: fire hydrants running out of water.

“How do you fight a fire with no water?” Ryan Babroff, a volunteer firefighter battling the Eaton Fire, told The Washington Post.

At some point this week, up to 20 per cent of the city’s hydrants went dry, according to LA mayor Karen Bass. And on Thursday night, firefighters had stopped tapping into hydrants at all.

“Right now, we’re not utilizing the hydrants,” Kristin M. Crowley, chief of the Los Angeles Fire Department, said Thursday.

Advertisement

By Friday, California Governor Gavin Newsom had called for an independent investigation into the hydrant issue.

“We need answers to ensure this does not happen again and we have every resource available to fight these catastrophic fires,” he wrote in a statement on X.

Critics have sounded off on the situation from near and far.

High water demand, blackouts, high winds, and aging infrastructure caused hydrants to run dry, according to experts

High water demand, blackouts, high winds, and aging infrastructure caused hydrants to run dry, according to experts (AP)

Rachel Darvish, a resident of the scorched Pacific Palisades neighborhood, went viral after she confronted Governor Newsom over the tapped-out hydrants, insisting she would “fill up the hydrants myself.”

Advertisement

Meanwhile, real estate developer and former L.A. mayoral candidate Rick Caruso alleged “absolute mismanagement by the city.”

Some on the right, meanwhile, have used the shocking water shortage to attack California’s Democratic leadership and policies. Donald Trump claimed the governor’s “gross incompetence” and decision not to open up “the water main” in Northern California was to blame, while Elon Musk has argued everything from environmental protections for endangered fish to the Los Angeles Fire Department’s diversity initiatives were behind the issues with the fire response.

According to experts and government officials, the water shortage issue is much more complex.

Why is there a water shortage?

A patchwork of municipal water systems feeds L.A., drawing water from 200 different utilities. They support a system designed to handle lower-level, urban fires, not multiple large-scale wildfires descending from the hills.

Advertisement
California mother confronts governor Gavin Newsom over raging wildfires in Los Angeles

“We are looking at a situation that is just completely not part of any domestic water system design,” Marty Adams, a former general manager and chief engineer at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, toldThe New York Times. “If this is going to be a norm, there is going to have to be some new thinking about how systems are designed.”

“It was like a worst-case scenario, but I think we should be planning for those worst-case scenarios,” Faith Kearns, a wildfire and water expert at Arizona State University, added in an interview with National Geographic. “You can’t predict everything, but also, I do think this is where we’re headed.”

Faced with a series of fires moving as fast as five football fields per minute, this system buckled.

When did fire hydrants run out?

By Wednesday, three 1 million gallon, high-elevation water tanks supplying the hard-hit Pacific Palisades went dry. High demand not only drained the tanks, and drew from water that would’ve been used to replenish them, but it also lowered pressure within the overall hydrant system, further straining the ability of firefighters to quickly get water.

Advertisement

“We had a tremendous demand on our system in the Palisades,” Janisse Quiñones, chief engineer at Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, said at a Wednesday briefing. “We pushed the system to the extreme.”

Some of that demand would’ve been met by a 117 million-gallon reservoir complex in the Pacific Palisades, but it sat out of use for repairs as the fires in the Palisades began. Officials estimate that had the Santa Ynez Reservoir been online, it would’ve cut demand on the area’s water system from four times to three times as high as normal.

“You still would have ended up with serious drops in pressure,” former Department of Water and Power general manager Adams toldThe Los Angeles Times. “Would Santa Ynez [Reservoir] have helped? Yes, to some extent. Would it have saved the day? I don’t think so.”

Making matters worse, the high winds that helped spread the fires also temporarily prevented officials from using aerial drops of water which could’ve been pulled from the ocean or Southern California’s reservoirs, which are currently sitting above historical levels.

Trump argued Gavin Newsom could’ve opened a water main to allow more water to reach Los Angeles, those experts say the state’s reservoirs weren’t to blame for the shortage

Advertisement
Trump argued Gavin Newsom could’ve opened a water main to allow more water to reach Los Angeles, those experts say the state’s reservoirs weren’t to blame for the shortage (AP)

And, as President Biden noted on Thursday, loss of electricity put up yet another impediment to getting water to hydrants, as blackouts impacted pumping systems.

Why did the water shortage cause electrical issues?

California Rep. Judy Chu told CNNNews Central on Friday that a FEMA administrator informed her that “they had to turn down the electricity in order to make sure that the fire wasn’t aggravated because of the electricity.”

“They need electricity in order to pump water. So, they turned that down,” she explained. “And then, at the same time, there were so many hydrants that were being used all at once. That aggravated the situation. In addition, they said, there are homes that have been devastated where the water wasn’t turned off. So, there actually are homes where the water is just pouring out and they have to go home by home to turn it off.”

Chu added that the situation is “in hand right now.”

Advertisement

Other fires, like the 2023 Maui fires and the 2017 Tubbs Fire in Northern California, have caused hydrants to go dry in the past, and it seems L.A. will need to go back to the drawing board if these kinds of wildfire-scale urban blazes become the new normal.

“There is a theoretical world, and maybe a world we’re entering into, where we could pay much, much more to have redundant water and power supply — because you need both [to fight fire], especially in terrains like this,” Greg Pierce, director of the UCLA Water Resources Group, told LAist. “I’m not even sure that would have made a difference when it comes to these types of wildfires, but that’s possible.”

“There’s no reason to think that [the Department of Water and Power] was particularly ill-prepared, no one was talking about them being ill-prepared for wildfires,” he said. “This caught everyone off guard, as far as I know.”

As the city seeks to fight the fires and rebuild, California leaders have sharply condemned outsiders trying to score political points.

“People are literally fleeing. People have lost their lives. Kids lost their schools. Families completely torn asunder. Churches burned down. And this guy wanted to politicize it,” Newsom said in response to Trump on CNN.

Advertisement



Source link

California

California threatens Tesla with 30-day suspension of sales license for deceptive self-driving claims

Published

on

California threatens Tesla with 30-day suspension of sales license for deceptive self-driving claims


SAN FRANCISCO — California regulators are threatening to suspend Tesla’s license to sell its electric cars in the state early next year unless the automaker tones down its marketing tactics for its self-driving features after a judge concluded the Elon Musk-led company has been misleading consumers about the technology’s capabilities.

The potential 30-day blackout of Tesla’s California sales is the primary punishment being recommended to the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles in a decision released late Tuesday. The ruling by Administrative Law Judge Juliet Cox determined that Tesla had for years engaged in deceptive marketing practices by using the terms “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” to promote the autonomous technology available in many of its cars.

After presiding over five days of hearings held in Oakland, California in July, Cox also recommended suspending Tesla’s license to manufacture cars at its plant in Fremont, California. But California regulators aren’t going to impose that part of the judge’s proposed penalty.

Tesla will have a 90-day window to make changes that more clearly convey the limits of its self-driving technology to avoid having its California sales license suspended. After California regulators filed its action against Tesla in 2023, the Austin, Texas, company already made one significant change by putting in wording that made it clear its Full Self-Driving package still required supervision by a human driver while it’s deployed.

Advertisement

“Tesla can take simple steps to pause this decision and permanently resolve this issue — steps autonomous vehicle companies and other automakers have been able to achieve,” said Steve Gordon, the director of the California Department of Motor Vehicles.

Tesla didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

The automaker has already been plagued by a global downturn in demand that began during a backlash to Musk’s high-profile role overseeing cuts in the U.S. government budget overseeing the Department of Government that President Donald Trump created in his administration. Increased competition and an older lineup of vehicles also weighed on Tesla sales, although the company did revamp its Model Y, the world’s bestselling vehicle, and unveil less-expensive versions of the Model Y and Model X.

Although Musk left Washington after a falling out with Trump, the fallout has continued to weigh on Tesla’s auto sales, which had decreased by 9% from 2024 through the first nine months of this year.

Despite the slump and the threatened sales suspension in California, Tesla’s stock price touched an all-time high $495.28 during Wednesday’s early trading before backtracking later to fall below $470. Despite that reversal, Tesla’s shares are still worth slightly more than they were before Musk’s ill-fated stint in the Trump administration — a “somewhat successful” assignment he recently said he wouldn’t take on again.

Advertisement

The performance of Tesla’s stock against the backdrop of eroding auto sales reflects the increasing emphasis that investors are placing on Musk’s efforts to develop artificial intelligence technology to implant into humanoid robots and a fleet of self-driving Teslas that will operate as robotaxis across the U.S.

Musk has been promising Tesla’s self-driving technology would fulfill his robotaxi vision for years without delivering on the promise, but the company finally began testing the concept in Austin earlier this year, albeit with a human supervisor in the car to take over if something went awry. Just a few days ago, Musk disclosed Tesla had started tests of its robotaxis without a safety monitor in the vehicle.

California regulators are far from the first critic to accuse Tesla of exaggerating the capabilities of its self-driving technology in a potentially dangerous manner. The company has steadfastly insisted that information contained in its vehicle’s owner’s manual on its website have made it clear that its self-driving technology still requires human supervision, even while releasing a 2020 video depicting one of its cars purportedly driving on its own. The video, cited as evidence against Tesla in the decision recommending a suspension of the company’s California sales license, remained on its website for nearly four years.

Tesla has been targeted in a variety of lawsuits alleging its mischaracterizations about self-driving technology have lulled humans into a false of security that have resulted in lethal accidents. The company has settled or prevailed in several cases, but earlier this year a Miami jury held Tesla partly responsible for a lethal crash in Florida that occurred while Autopilot was deployed and ordered the automaker to pay more than $240 million in damages.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

California warns Tesla faces 30-day sale ban for misleading use of

Published

on

California warns Tesla faces 30-day sale ban for misleading use of



The California DMV on Tuesday said Tesla Motors faces a possible 30-day sale ban over its misleading use of the term “autopilot” in its marketing of electric vehicles.

On Nov. 20, an administrative judge ruled that Tesla Motors’ use of “autopilot ” and “full self-driving capability” was a misleading description of its “advanced driving assistant features,” and that it violated state law, the DMV said.

In their decision, the judge proposed suspending Tesla’s manufacturing and dealer license for 30 days. However, the DMV is giving Tesla 60 days to address its use of the term “autopilot” before temporarily suspending its dealer license.

Advertisement

“Tesla can take simple steps to pause this decision and permanently resolve this issue — steps autonomous vehicle companies and other automakers have been able to achieve in California’s nation-leading and supportive innovation marketplace,” DMV Director Steve Gordon said.

Tesla had already stopped its use of “full self-driving capability” and switched to “full self-driving (supervised)” after the DMV filed accusations against it in November 2023.

The DMV said its decision to file those accusations stretches back to Tesla’s 2021 marketing of its advanced driver assistance system. Besides the two terms, the DMV said it also took issue with the phrase, “The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long-distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat.”

“Vehicles equipped with those ADAS features could not at the time of those advertisements, and cannot now, operate as autonomous vehicles,” the DMV said.

As for the manufacturing license suspension, the DMV issued a permanent stay on that proposal.

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

Former California doctor sentenced in Matthew Perry’s overdose death

Published

on

Former California doctor sentenced in Matthew Perry’s overdose death


LOS ANGELES — A former California doctor was sentenced to 8 months of home detention and 3 years of supervised release Tuesday after pleading guilty to ketamine distribution in connection with the fatal overdose of “Friends” star Matthew Perry.

Mark Chavez pleaded guilty in 2024 to one count of conspiring to distribute ketamine to Perry, who died at 54. Chavez appeared Tuesday before U.S. District Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett in Los Angeles. He faced up to 10 years in prison.

He will also be required to complete 300 hours of community service and pay a $100 special assessment to the U.S. government.

“My heart goes out to the Perry family,” Chavez said outside of court after his sentencing.

Advertisement

Zach Brooks, a member of Chavez’s legal team, said Tuesday: “what occurred in this case was a profound departure from the life he had lived up to that point. The consequences have been severe and permanent. Mr. Chavez has lost his career, his livelihood, and professional identity that he has worked for decades to develop.”

“Looking forward, Mr. Chavez understands that accountability does not end with this sentence. He’s committed to using the rest of his life to contribute positively, to support others and to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again,” Brooks said. “While he cannot undo what occurred, he can choose how he lives his life from this moment.”

Chavez was one of five people charged in connection with Perry’s death. The TV star died of an accidental overdose and was found dead in a hot tub at his Los Angeles home in October 2023.

Chavez’s lawyer, Matthew Binninger, has previously said his client was “incredibly remorseful” and “accepting responsibility” for his patient’s overdose.

Chavez was a licensed physician in San Diego who formerly operated a ketamine clinic. Prosecutors said he sold ketamine to another doctor, Salvador Plasencia, who then distributed it to Perry.

Advertisement

“I wonder how much this moron will pay,” Plasencia said in a text exchange to Chavez, according to the investigators. “Lets find out.”

Earlier this month, Plasencia was sentenced to two and a half years in federal prison for his involvement in the case.

Chavez wrote “a fraudulent prescription in a patient’s name without her knowledge or consent, and lied to wholesale ketamine distributors to buy additional vials of liquid ketamine that Chavez intended to sell to Plasencia for distribution to Perry,” the indictment in the case said.

In the month before his death, the doctors provided Perry with about 20 vials of ketamine and received some $55,000 in cash, according to federal prosecutors.

Perry was undergoing ketamine infusion therapy to treat depression and anxiety, according to a coroner’s report. However, the levels of ketamine in his body at the time of his death were dangerously high, roughly the same amount used for general anesthesia during surgery. The coroner ruled his death an accident.

Advertisement

Before his death, Perry was open about his lengthy struggles with opioid addiction and alcohol use disorder, which he chronicled in his 2022 memoir, “Friends, Lovers and the Big Terrible Thing.”

Katie Wall reported from Los Angeles and Daniella Silva reported from New York.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending