Jennifer, whether you are right or wrong about the number of days over 35 degrees is irrelevant, because these days will occur in January and each year. They were also at Bathurst, not where the fires were. This is simply a red herring. I am sorry that you started your analysis there, because I think you wasted your time.

I am not sure I have seen anyone state that they perceive there have been more days over 35 degrees at Bathurst compared to the early part of the 20th Century, so I am not sure what these perceptions you are talking about. Perhaps you can link to them?

The fires in the Blue Mountains this year are the result of increased vegetative growth resulting from the strong La Nina of 2010-2012, the lack of spring rain in 2013 and the early onset of warm weather in spring 2013 hampering efforts in fuel reduction. The last thing needed was something to set the fires off: seemingly the Army, powerlines and arsonists in this case.

Did climate change contribute to the fires? I suspect the answer will be yes. As spring temperatures in 2013 in the region were about 4 degrees above the long-term average, the fires once started were able to move faster than they normally would at this time of year. Otherwise, it might have been January before there were fires. If spring temperatures continue to increase, there is a likelihood of major fires in spring more often (should all the other factors be present).

Agronomist - I suspect you are missing Jennifer's point.

She agrees with you regarding the cause of the fire, the buildup of fuel, La Nina weather and high rainfall etc. Read her most recent article on her blog by Roger Underwood.

http://jennifermarohasy.com

What she is attempting to demonstrate is that there is no evidence that global warming is a factor in creating the fires as the ABC, Fairfax and the Greens have been consistently, albeit erroneously suggesting.

I've shown in my previous post that there is no science in the peer reviewed literature that can find the footprint of global warming on the extreme weather events we have recently experienced. The Blue mountain fires are no different.

Janama, that document you linked to from Risk Frontiers is not from Macquarie University, but from a research group at the University funded by the insurance industry to look at risks for the insurance industry. I have nothing against the insurance industry funding research, I just like a bit of accuracy.

Their research about economic impacts is based on insurance losses. This in itself has some issues with respect to whether it is fine enough to detect an influence of climate change. So an event like a hailstorm in the Sydney region with one death due to a lightning strike will have substantially more influence in this analysis than a bushfire in central Victoria that kills 173 people.

It also only deals with insured items (structures, cars) not other economic losses, such as loss of productivity caused by burning of vegetation, flooding of agricultural land, loss of income through closure of businesses. So it really isn’t a full economic impact analysis.

Lastly, the insurance industry itself responds to losses caused by natural disasters to reduce its exposure to future losses. That factor has not been included in the analysis.

While the insurance industry might be quietly confident that they are not losing too much money as a result of the impacts of climate change, I am less convinced that this document genuinely reflects reality.

Like Pericles, I find it absolutely reprehensible that people are asked to risk their lives for stupidity.
It is gobsmacking that in the 21st century homes and lives are being lost to a hazard that has been known and recognised for at least 150 years.
I grew up in the Blue Mountains, at Faulconbridge. I witnessed a few fires in that time, including major ones in 1968 and (I think) 74.
At no time was I, my family or my (timber/fibro) home in any real danger, despite backing on to the natural bush; simply because we had a long back yard with extensive lawns and gardens.
Duh.
A few years back I visited a mate who still lived in the area, and was shocked at how close the bush was to his house. He told me Council wouldn't let him cut down trees.
That was at Winmalee. He has since moved on, which is fortunate, because his old house (new, brick) has recently burnt down.
I think the Blue Mountains Council should be liable for all lives and property lost due to their stupid, indefensible policies.
You want to solve the problem? Sensible fire breaks around all buildings, and ensure no mature trees closer than one and a half times their own height to any building. It's that simple.
This is very much a case of “fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”
These people have been fooled for 150 years.
As to climate change, you're looking in the wrong place. Yes, Abbot is correct that fires have always occurred in the Mountains -although not usually so early in the year. Drier summers are going to create fire hazards where -and when- they haven't previously existed.