Palisades Fire Proven to Be an Unnatural Disaster
Misrepresenting this as a “Natural Disaster” will encourage similar outcomes and greater fire risk in the future.
Report Summary
This report from FireRebuild.com provides a focused analysis of the January 7, 2025 Palisades Fire specific to Burning Index and Fuel Moisture. It is important to clarify that this report does not assert that climate change is not real or is not impacting fire risk. Instead, it leverages 46 years of scientific data to demonstrate that Pacific Palisades has, in fact, experienced far greater fire risks in the past, characterized by more extreme Burning Index values, lower Fuel Moisture, and higher wind speeds. These past severe conditions were either prevented through proactive measures like controlled burns and brush clearance, or effectively mitigated by fire department efforts.
By focusing on the Burning Index and Fuel Moisture, the report finds that the fire danger levels on January 7, 2025, were only moderately high, ranking below numerous previous peak fire risk events. Drawing on official data and validated against long-term climatological records, the report emphasizes that this fire was not a natural inevitability but a preventable disaster, caused by failures in leadership, preparedness, and emergency response.
Share Link: https://firerebuild.com/share/fire/
Summary
Palisades Fire: Normal Weather, Not Extreme
The Palisades Fire on January 7, 2025, occurred under fire weather conditions that were neither extreme nor unprecedented, as confirmed by historical fire risk and wind speed data. This report is the final weather-based analysis from FireRebuild.com and is intended to complement the Palisades Fire Weather Report and Analysis by focusing specifically on the Burning Index (BI) and Fuel Moisture (FM) data to evaluate relative fire danger and the context of emergency response. Additional topics, including brush clearance, water resources, and budgetary factors, will be addressed in forthcoming reports.
Considering wind speeds and drought conditions have already been shown not to be exceptional during this event, this report centers on Fuel Moisture and the Burning Index. Fuel Moisture refers to the amount of water present in a given fuel, expressed as a percentage of its oven-dry weight, and is a critical determinant of a fuel’s flammability. The Burning Index, a core component of the National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS), is widely regarded as the most comprehensive single metric for assessing fire danger and the potential for a fire to become uncontainable under prevailing weather and fuel conditions. This technical report provides a focused analysis of FM and BI data related to the Palisades Fire, using objective fire risk metrics from the Fire Environment Mapping System (FEMS) to assess the severity of conditions surrounding the event.
Ignition: Moderate Fire Risk, Not Extreme
Drawing from high-resolution, hourly observations collected at five fire weather stations within a 30-mile radius of the fire’s origin, the report finds that the Burning Index peaked that day at 380, with wind speeds reaching a maximum of 38 mph. However, at approximately 10 a.m. on January 7, when the fire erupted, the maximum Burning Index reported was only 200, with wind speeds of 18 mph and wind gusts of 28 mph. These values are consistent with moderately high fire danger levels by Southern California standards and collectively rank the January 7 peak during the Palisades Fire at approximately #135 in terms of overall fire risk in recent history (from June 1, 2007, to January 7, 2025), when considering both Burning Index and wind data. Although Fuel Moisture readings were low on January 7, 2025, they fell within the same range as all events presented as examples in the report.
Regional Data Confirms Normal Conditions
To validate these findings, the station data was cross-referenced with a broader climatological dataset from 1,149 of Climatology Lab’s gridMET locations within a 50 mile radius of the fire’s origin spanning 1979 through 2025. The regional dataset confirmed that the observed conditions were well within historical norms and not indicative of an extreme fire weather event. The dataset (Latitude: 34.06666, Longitude: -118.55833) located 0.83 miles from the fire’s origin further aligns with the five regional stations that January 7, 2025 was not a historically high fire risk. Data from the Fire Environment Mapping System (FEMS) is primarily used in the report because this data contains Burning Index as well as Wind Speed and Gust Speed from the same data source. All reports on Fuel Moisture readings were taken from gridMET.
Prior Events: Greater Risks, No Major Disasters
To contextualize the severity of the Palisades Fire, the report compares it to three prior high-risk fire weather events from November 2021, 2022, and 2024. Each of those events recorded significantly higher fire danger metrics, with Burning Index values exceeding 440 and wind gusts surpassing 70 mph. Importantly, despite these elevated and more severe risk levels, no wildfire disasters comparable to the Palisades Fire occurred during those periods due to effective emergency response.
Preventable Disaster: Leadership, Not Nature, Fueled Fire
This analysis definitively disproves the false claim that the Palisades Fire was an unavoidable act of nature, as asserted by both Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Governor Gavin Newsom in January 2025, with the statement, “[Palisades Fire] is one of the worst natural disasters in U.S. history.” (First quoted on NBC’s “Meet the Press” which aired on Sunday, January 12, 2025.) Instead, this report confirms that the fire did not result from unprecedented environmental conditions but occurred during a period of historically consistent fire risk. By highlighting comparable events successfully mitigated under more severe conditions, the report reinforces the critical importance of leadership in preparedness and response systems, specifically concerning budget allocation and operational competence. The Palisades Fire is as a clear example of a preventable disaster stemming from systemic human failures, not an unparalleled natural catastrophe.
Note: Fuel Moisture is shown inverted (low to high) to align visually with other metrics. The lower the moisture percentage, the greater the fire risk.
Interactive Map of Burning Index, Fuel Moisture, and Wind Speeds
The map displays the primary 5 stations within 30 miles of the fire origin provided records from 2007.
Table of Contents
Section 1: Event Review
The Palisades Fire stands out not because of extreme weather, but because of a systemic failure to act under conditions that were significantly less severe than past fire weather events. This analysis reviews three prior high-risk scenarios from November 2021, 2022, and 2024, each with higher fire danger indices, lower fuel moisture levels, and stronger wind gusts. In all of those cases, no major wildfires occurred, due to timely and effective emergency response.
For example, on November 25, 2021, the Burning Index reached an all-time high of 518.11, with gusts of 74 mph and critically low fuel moisture. Yet, due to a successful and proactive mitigation effort, no fire disaster occurred. Similar outcomes were seen in November 2022 and November 2024, when Burning Index values exceeded 440, wind gusts topped 64 mph, and multiple ignitions were successfully contained through rapid, coordinated firefighting.
In contrast, the Palisades Fire on January 7, 2025 erupted under comparatively moderate conditions. The Burning Index peaked at 380.24, ranking only #135 since 2007, and winds and fuel moisture were less severe than in prior high-risk events. Despite this, the fire spread rapidly, highlighting a critical failure in emergency coordination and leadership. This was not a natural escalation of environmental danger, but an unnatural disaster caused by inaction and poor governance.
The data reveals a pattern: when fire risks are not adequately mitigated, the Burning Index tends to rise the next day, indicating compounding danger. This trend was observed both during the Woolsey Fire (BI increased from 285.32 to 452.88) and the Palisades Fire (BI rose from 199.96 to 489.61). In contrast, November 25, 2021, demonstrates the opposite, effective mitigation drove the BI down from 518.11 to 392.22 the following day.
Ultimately, this analysis reinforces that even under extreme environmental conditions, disaster can be avoided. And conversely, under moderate conditions, failure to respond can still lead to catastrophe.
Event Data Format
- Burning Index: Maximum value for date (Station, Time) – Ranked fire risk
- Wind Speed: Maximum value for date (Station, Time)
- Wind Gust: Maximum value for date (Station, Time)
- Fuel Moisture Content (FMC): 100-hour: *See Below, 1000-hour: *See Below
*Event Fuel Moisture readings were taken within 1 mile from the 2025 fire origin in Pacific Palisades.
Event A: November 25, 2021 – Fire Risk Ranked #1
Highest Burning Index Recorded – Successfully Mitigated
- Burning Index: 518.11 (CMAL, 11:00 AM) – Ranked #1 since 2007
- Wind Speed: 51 mph (CMAL, 11:00 AM)
- Wind Gust: 74 mph (CMAL, 11:00 AM)
- Fuel Moisture Content (FMC): 100-hour: 9.6%, 1000-hour: 11.9%
Despite record setting fire danger conditions, no major wildfire occurred. This was a successful mitigation by the fire department during extreme red flag conditions.
Event B: November 24, 2022 – Fire Risk Ranked #4
Fourth Highest Burning Index – Successfully Mitigated
- Burning Index: 494.69 (CMAL, 10:00 PM) – Ranked #4 since 2007
- Wind Speed: 41 mph (CMAL, 10:00 PM)
- Wind Gust: 64 mph (CCHB, 7:00 PM)
- Fuel Moisture Content (FMC): 100-hour: 7.8%, 1000-hour: 12.1%
Despite widespread red flag warnings, aggressive response prevented escalation into a major incident.
CBS LA Report
ABC News Coverage
Event C: November 6, 2024 – Fire Risk Ranked #20
Multiple Fires, High Index – Successfully Mitigated
- Burning Index: 447.53 (CMAL, 7:00 PM) – Ranked #20 since 2007
- Wind Speed: 45 mph (CMAL, 7:00 PM)
- Wind Gust: 64 mph (CCHB, 7:00 PM)
- Fuel Moisture Content (FMC): 100-hour: 9.6%, 1000-hour: 12.2%
A cluster of ignitions, including the Broad Fire (Los Angeles), Mountain Fire (Ventura), Lemon Fire, Valley Fire, and Lake Fire, were contained before catastrophic spread showcasing a coordinated emergency response.
Event D: January 7, 2025 – Fire Risk Ranked #135
Palisades Fire: Unnatural Disaster and Leadership Failure
- Burning Index: 380.24 (CCHB, 10:00 PM) – Ranked #135 since 2007
- Wind Speed: 38 mph (CCHB, 7:00 PM)
- Wind Gust: 63 mph (CMAL, 6:00 PM)
- Fuel Moisture Content (FMC): 100-hour: 11%, 1000-hour: 11.5%
Unlike the previous high-risk events, the Palisades Fire erupted despite relatively moderate conditions, exposing systemic breakdowns in leadership and coordination. This incident was an unnatural disaster and a failure of governance, not simply a product of environmental risk.
Section 2: Burning Index
The grid below provides the maximum values for Burning Index, Wind Speed, and Gust Speed for each hour of each day with the station that recorded the maximum value.
Important Note:
As stated previously, for the analysis of this report, data from the Fire Environment Mapping System (FEMS) is used because it offers critical advantages: it provides hourly values and includes both wind speed and gust speed, along with comprehensive weather data, factors essential for understanding fire behavior dynamics in real time.
While the Climatology Lab also produces Burning Index (BI) data aligned to the standard 1–100 scale, it is limited to daily values and lacks the associated meteorological detail needed for in-depth risk assessment.
Importantly, the BI values from both FEMS and Climatology Lab are nearly identical in magnitude, ensuring consistency in interpretation. Emphasizing this alignment allows the analysis to leverage the richer temporal and contextual data from FEMS without compromising the reliability of the BI measure itself.
Monthly (CSV) | Daily (CSV) | Hourly (CSV)
Section 3: Fuel Moisture
Fuel Moisture Content (FMC) is a critical factor in wildland fire behavior, representing the amount of water present in a given fuel, expressed as a percentage of its oven-dry weight. For fire management, dead fuels are often categorized by “time-lag classes,” which describe how quickly they gain or lose moisture in response to atmospheric changes.
100-hour fuels typically consist of dead woody material ranging from 1 to 3 inches in diameter, such as small branches and larger twigs. These fuels respond to weather changes over a period of approximately 100 hours (about 4 days), meaning their moisture content is influenced by conditions over several days.
In contrast, 1000-hour fuels are larger, dead woody materials, typically 3 to 8 inches in diameter (like logs and large downed branches). Due to their size, these fuels have a much slower moisture exchange rate, taking roughly 1000 hours (about 42 days) to significantly adjust to new environmental conditions.
Consequently, 1000-hour FMC values are often used as an indicator of longer-term drying trends and drought severity, while 100-hour FMC reflects more recent weather influences, both providing crucial insights into overall fuel flammability and potential fire behavior.
Fuel Moisture Since 1979
This chart focuses specifically on the Fuel Moisture Content (FMC) for both 100-hour and 1000-hour fuels within a 1-mile radius of the fire origin in Pacific Palisades. The detailed historical record extends back to January 1, 1979, providing a robust dataset for analyzing long-term trends and seasonal variations in fuel dryness. This information, provided by the Climatology Lab, is crucial for understanding the historical flammability of fuels in this immediate area and informing fire management strategies.
As shown in the chart tracking Fuel Moisture levels since 1979, climate change was not a contributing factor in the 2025 Palisades Fire. In fact, the red line marks the “Palisades Fire” value to indicate that Fuel Moisture levels on the day of the fire were well within the average and predictable range observed over the past 46 years.
Note: The lower the number, the greater the risk.
Fuel Moisture Since 1979 Including 20 Mile Radius
This grid provides a comprehensive overview of Fuel Moisture Content (FMC) for two critical fuel classes, 100-hour and 1000-hour fuels, in the vicinity of a fire origin in Pacific Palisades. The data is presented for two distinct spatial scales: a 1-mile radius and a 20-mile radius from the fire’s starting point.
This extensive dataset, stretching back to January 1, 1979, allows for detailed historical analysis of fuel dryness, offering valuable insights into long-term fire risk trends and the impact of climatic conditions on fuel flammability in the Pacific Palisades area. The information was provided by the Climatology Lab.
As clearly seen, the Fuel Moisture during the Palisades Fire was not unprecedented and was less of a risk than previously in history.
Note: The lower the number, the greater the risk.
Section 4: Comparisons
Analysis of the comparison tables for Burning Index and Fuel Moisture levels, featuring data recorded 0.83 miles from the fire’s origin, unequivocally shows that conditions during the 2025 Palisades Fire were historically predictable and fell within expected ranges based on 46 years of historical data. The data in these tables, which track these levels since 1979, confirms that on the day of the fire, January 7, 2025, both the Burning Index and Fuel Moisture levels were well within the observed average and predictable range, indicating that climate change was not a contributing factor.
Burning Index Comparison
The comparison table below shows Burning Index records from 0.83 miles from the fire’s origin. The Day of Fire represents the Burning Index recorded on January 7, 2025. The Min, Mean, Median, and Max values represent the overall values recorded from January 1, 1979, to June 1, 2025.
| Day of Fire | Min | Mean | Median | Max |
| 53 BI | 0 BI | 30.56 BI | 33 BI | 91 BI |
Note: The BI scale used here is based on the 100-scale. The five stations previously mentioned are not based on the 100-scale.
Fuel Moisture 100 Hour
The comparison table below shows Fuel Moisture 100 Hour records from 0.83 miles from the fire’s origin. The Day of Fire represents the Fuel Moisture 100 Hour recorded on January 7, 2025. The Min, Mean, Median, and Max values represent the overall values recorded from January 1, 1979, to June 1, 2025.
| Day of Fire | Min | Mean | Median | Max |
| 11% | 4.4% | 12.64% | 12.5% | 26.7% |
Fuel Moisture 1000 Hour
The comparison table below shows Fuel Moisture 1000 Hour records from 0.83 miles from the fire’s origin. The Day of Fire represents the Fuel Moisture 1000 Hour recorded on January 7, 2025. The Min, Mean, Median, and Max values represent the overall values recorded from January 1, 1979, to June 1, 2025.
| Day of Fire | Min | Mean | Median | Max |
| 11.5% | 7% | 13.63% | 13.3% | 27.7% |
Section 5: Data Sources
The analysis of the Palisades Fire primarily utilized data from the Fire Environment Mapping System (FEMS), covering hourly fire danger and weather readings from five stations within 30 miles of the fire’s origin between 2005 and 2025. Over 4.3 million fire danger readings and 895,000 weather records were processed, extracting the highest hourly values for key fire danger indicators and wind metrics to represent worst-case conditions. A secondary data source, the gridMET dataset from the Climatology Lab at the University of California, Merced, provided comprehensive gridded climate data from 1979 to 2025. This dataset, comprising over 322 million records across 1,149 locations within a 50-mile radius, offered historical context for climate and fire danger variables. Both primary and secondary data sets are available for download in CSV format, enabling a comprehensive, multi-scale understanding of the fire environment conditions surrounding the Palisades Fire.
Primary Data Source
All fire danger and weather data presented here were sourced from the Fire Environment Mapping System (FEMS) and its official data repository. This dataset was used because it contains both fire danger and weather data.
The dataset spans January 1, 2005 through March 1, 2025, and includes hourly readings from five fire weather stations located within 30 miles of the origin for the 2025 Palisades Fire:
| Station | ID | Latitude | Longitude | Elevation (ft) | Distance from Fire Origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leo Carrillo, CA | CLEO (45447) | 34.06156 | -118.64522 | 1,575 | 5.8 miles |
| Malibu Canyon, CA | CMCN (45452) | 34.12486 | -118.41257 | 1,260 | 8.4 miles |
| Malibu Hills, CA | CMAL (45433) | 34.08394 | -118.70345 | 610 | 9.1 miles |
| Beverly Hills, CA | CBEV (45442) | 34.18658 | -118.71956 | 1,707 | 12.8 miles |
| Cheeseboro, CA | CCHB (45313) | 34.04511 | -118.93599 | 50 | 22.5 miles |
Original Primary Data Volume
To produce the final reduced dataset, over 4.3 million fire danger readings and 895,000 weather records were evaluated from the following stations:
Fire Danger Records (2005–2025)
- Beverly Hills (CBEV): 895,265 records
- Cheeseboro (CCHB): 895,115 records
- Leo Carrillo (CLEO): 842,357 records
- Malibu Hills (CMAL): 827,274 records
- Malibu Canyon (CMCN): 895,420 records
Weather Records (2005–2025)
- Beverly Hills (CBEV): 179,087 records
- Cheeseboro (CCHB): 179,054 records
- Leo Carrillo (CLEO): 179,022 records
- Malibu Hills (CMAL): 179,101 records
- Malibu Canyon (CMCN): 179,121 records
Methodology
For each hour and station, the highest recorded values were extracted to reflect the worst-case conditions for that time frame. The following metrics were processed this way:
- Fire Danger Indicators:
- Burning Index (BI)
- Ignition Component (IC)
- Energy Release Component (ERC)
- Spread Component (SC)
- Wind Metrics:
- Wind Speed
- Wind Gust
The maximum value across all five stations was used to represent each hour of every day in the study period. This approach prioritizes peak fire danger conditions across the region.
Data Files
The processed datasets are available for download in three formats:
Each file provides an aggregated view of fire danger and weather indicators for use in research, fire behavior modeling, and regional risk analysis.
Secondary Data Source
In addition to the primary station-level datasets used to evaluate hourly fire danger conditions, a comprehensive gridded climate dataset was analyzed to provide regional context and long-term climatological trends. This secondary analysis leveraged the gridMET dataset developed by the Climatology Lab at the University of California, Merced, encompassing 46 years of high-resolution climate data from 1979 to 2025.
Source & Scope
All secondary data were obtained directly from the gridMET repository (https://www.climatologylab.org/gridmet.html), which provides daily surface meteorological and fire danger indices for the contiguous United States. The analysis focused on 1,149 unique geographic locations situated within a 50-mile radius of the 2025 Palisades Fire origin point. This spatial radius was selected to ensure regional consistency with the event’s meteorological drivers while capturing terrain and microclimate variation.
Data Volume & Processing
The raw gridMET data was sourced from a compressed 83.64 GB archive of NetCDF files. A total of 322,087,680 records were reviewed across all variables and time points, comprising:
- 419,385 spatial grid points × 46 years
- 16 datasets total, including both fire danger indices and climate variables
This dataset spans from January 1, 1979 through March 1, 2025, offering a continuous 46-year daily time series.
Variables Analyzed
The following climate and fire danger variables were analyzed:
- Fire Danger Indices
- Meteorological Parameters
tmmx: Maximum Daily Temperaturetmmn: Minimum Daily Temperaturepr: Precipitation Accumulationsrad: Surface Downwelling Shortwave Radiationvs: Wind Speedth: Wind Directionrmax: Maximum Relative Humidityrmin: Minimum Relative Humiditysph: Specific Humidityetr/pet: Potential Evapotranspirationvpd: Mean Vapor Pressure Deficit
Location data for data above.
(Data is available in CSV format containing min, mean, and max values from 1979 to 2025)
Methodology
All variables were extracted and processed uniformly across the 1,149 locations. For each dataset, records were grouped by date, allowing for both spatial aggregation and temporal trend analysis. Emphasis was placed on identifying historical extremes, climatological anomalies, and deviations relevant to the Palisades Fire conditions in 2025.
Analytical outputs included:
- Daily max/min/mean statistics per variable
- Location-based trend profiles to assess regional variability
- Comparative baselines to determine the percentile ranking of 2025 metrics relative to historical norms
Purpose & Application
This secondary dataset was essential for establishing baseline climatology and identifying whether fire danger conditions present during the 2025 Palisades Fire were exceptional, average, or below-normal when viewed against multi-decade regional trends.
Combined with the higher-frequency, localized primary data, this secondary data source enabled:
- Cross-validation of station-based extremes
- Analysis of macro-scale drought and fuel moisture conditions
- Support for modeling ignition likelihood, flame length, and fire spread potential in climatological context
Together, the primary and secondary sources offer a comprehensive, multi-scale depiction of fire environment conditions surrounding the Palisades Fire.
Appendix A: Definitions
This section defines key metrics and terminology used throughout FireRebuild.com. These terms describe fire danger, wind behavior, and severe weather events, with data sourced primarily from the National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) and NOAA.
Fire Danger Indicators
These values are derived from the National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS), which evaluates fire potential based on fuel, weather, and topographic conditions. Each metric reflects a different aspect of fire behavior.
Burning Index (BI)
Best overall hazard indicator
- Combines Spread Component (SC) and Energy Release Component (ERC).
- Directly correlates to flame length:
BI ÷ 10 ≈ flame length in feet - Used operationally to assess suppression difficulty and fireline intensity.
- Scale: 0–200+ (no theoretical upper limit)
- National Fire Danger Rating System – BI
Ignition Component (IC)
Best for ignition likelihood
- Represents the percentage chance (0–100%) that a firebrand (spark or ember) will ignite a wildfire.
- A higher IC means more favorable conditions for ignition (e.g., dry fuels, low humidity, wind).
- Used to understand how easily new fires may start.
- National Fire Danger Rating System – IC
Energy Release Component (ERC)
Best for fire intensity potential
- Reflects the potential energy output (BTUs per square foot) if a fire ignites.
- Represents fuel dryness and burn depth—higher ERCs mean fires will burn hotter and longer.
- Helps forecast mop-up difficulty and suppression intensity.
- National Fire Danger Rating System – ERC
Spread Component (SC)
Best for rate of spread
- Indicates how fast a flaming front might move across fuels under current conditions.
- Driven by wind speed and fuel type.
- Expressed in feet per minute; no theoretical upper limit.
- National Fire Danger Rating System – SC
Wind Metrics
Wind Speed- The average horizontal wind speed over a set period (typically 1 minute).
- Measured in miles per hour (mph).
- Sustained winds contribute to faster fire spread and more intense flame lengths.
- NOAA Glossary – Wind Speed
- The maximum instantaneous wind speed, typically measured over 3–5 seconds.
- Can cause sudden fire flare-ups, spot fires, and erratic fire behavior.
- Measured in miles per hour (mph).
- NWS Wind Gust Explanation
Weather Terminology
Defined by the National Hurricane Center (NHC) and National Weather Service, these terms refer to organized tropical weather systems and their potential severity.
Tropical Depression- A tropical cyclone with maximum sustained winds < 39 mph (34 knots).
- Typically brings minor wind disturbance.
- A tropical cyclone with sustained winds of 39–73 mph (34–63 knots).
- May cause strong winds and minor to moderate damage.
- A tropical cyclone with sustained winds ≥ 74 mph (64 knots).
- Categorized using the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale:
- Category 1: 74–95 mph
- Category 2: 96–110 mph
- Category 3: 111–129 mph (major hurricane)
- Category 4: 130–156 mph
- Category 5: ≥ 157 mph
Credit
Contact: contact@firerebuild.com