Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Where life irritates science.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                       

Put in lakes after the fires

Why just leave it to burn next year?
  (-4)
(-4)
  [vote for,
against]

We've got lots of good fixed-wing aircraft, like the CL-415, or CL-215 designed to scoop water directly from lakes. However, some areas lack the lakes big enough. But here's a solution: build the lakes right where a fire has burned! The CLs need 410 meters of distance on water, so a circular lake 1000 meters in diameter would be big enough to service such a plane with ease.

Original filling of the lake and keeping enough water in it will be a hassle, but the shortened trips required to refill the firefighting planes will makes the costs worthwhile.

In most cases, a well can be drilled to get the water. Low cost windbreaks can make sure not much water evaporates while the lake is filling, among other measures.

The lake will need to be at least 2 meters deep to be useful, but it might pay off to dig it to 10 meters depth average, or more. The depth should be enough for a thermocline that will slow evaporation, so that the lake can last.

Madai, Feb 09 2006

Firefighting bombs Firefighting_20bombs
[bungston, Feb 09 2006]

[link]






       "Put it right where the fire was? What, here? On this steep hillside?"
hippo, Feb 09 2006
  

       The lake would be a little over 180 acres in size.   

       In a california wildfire, where 300,000 acres have burned, finding a place to put a lake thatisn't a steep hillside will be a piece of cake.   

       This won't be cost effective in some habitats, but it california, wildfire damage was 2.5 billion one year, and the biome in question, chaparral, does not require fires.   

       longshot, the type of bomb you are talking about is a fuel-air explosive, or sometime similiar. You can't really direct the blast on those.
Madai, Feb 09 2006
  

       The idea of making large bodies of water is Widely Known To Exist [Marked-for-deletion]. Choosing a specific location to put them does not an invention make.
hidden truths, Feb 09 2006
  

       What if large bombs dropped from a great height were used to make the lake? And fight the fire!   

       [longshot] - see linked idea re firefighting bombs. It seems like a good idea to me too.
bungston, Feb 09 2006
  

       [bungston] Fight fire with fire!
hippo, Feb 10 2006
  

       The invention is not lakes itself, but the system to automatically put lakes in after fires. That is what does not exist, much to the detriment of some fire-prone areas.
Madai, Feb 10 2006
  

       Better still, build lakes *before* the fire, thus removing all flammable material from the getgo.
moomintroll, Feb 10 2006
  

       Hard to convince people to clear away a bunch of plants. Easier to convince them to clear away some charred remains.
Madai, Feb 10 2006
  

       I wasn't actually serious, [Mad] ;)
Logically, that'd result in us all living ankle-deep in water.
moomintroll, Feb 10 2006
  

       What? You'd need these lake for wildfires, not anwereh near where people live, silly. and I'm thinking of, say, one 180 acres or so lake to service a wild area 20 miles in radius... over 700,000 acres.
Madai, Feb 10 2006
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle