The California Highway Patrol said the fire was first reported around 10 p.m. in the third lane of westbound state Highway 92 at the bridge's decline. As many as ten people were inside the limo and as many as five of them died, according to multiple reports

Witnesses at the scene reported people were trapped inside the burning limo.

CHP officer Art Montiel said officials did not know where the women were going at the time of the fire. He said the San Mateo County coroner will release the names of the women who died after their families have been notified.

Ten people were inside the vehicle at the time, including nine women and the driver, Montiel said.

 Four women and the driver, whose gender was not known, escaped. Five of the women, however, were unable to escape from the vehicle and were confirmed dead when officers arrived on-scene.

Two of the four women who escaped were taken to Stanford Hospital and two others were taken to Valley Medical Center in San Jose. All four are being treated for smoke inhalation and burns. The driver was not injured.

It appears the fire started in the back of the limosine, but specifically where or how is still under investigation.

Mercury News

At the heart of Obama administration's new Arctic policy document, which outlines the US government's strategic priorities in the region over the next 10 years, lies a simple but rather appalling contradiction between America's eagerness "to make the most of the emerging economic opportunities in the region" due to the rapid loss of Arctic summer sea ice, and the recognition of "the need to protect and conserve this unique, valuable, and changing environment."

Unfortunately, despite the numerous references to "preservation" and "conservation" of nature, the new policy document fails to specify any steps that US can take to mitigate or prevent the disappearance of the Arctic sea ice due to the ever-growing threat of global warming.

From the outset, the document seeks to "position the United States to respond effectively to challenges and emerging opportunities arising from significant increases in Arctic activity due to the diminishment of sea ice and the emergence of a new Arctic environment."

In other words, it seems that the very success of the new Arctic strategy is premised upon the disappearance of the Arctic summer sea ice. 

Indeed, noting that "ocean resources are more readily accessible as sea ice diminishes", the strategy document points out that:

"The reduction in sea ice has been dramatic, abrupt, and unrelenting. The dense, multi-year ice is giving way to thin layers of seasonal ice, making more of the region navigable year-round. Scientific estimates of technically recoverable conventional oil and gas resources north of the Arctic Circle total approximately 13 percent of the world's undiscovered oil and 30 percent of the world's undiscovered gas deposits, as well as vast quantities of mineral resources, including rare earth elements, iron ore, and nickel. These estimates have inspired fresh ideas for commercial initiatives and infrastructure development in the region. As portions of the Arctic Ocean become more navigable, there is increasing interest in the viability of the Northern Sea Route and other potential routes, including the Northwest Passage, as well as in development of Arctic resources."

Further, the Obama administration identifies three fundamental objectives in the Arctic region. First, the document seeks to advance US "security interests" by increasing US military and commercial presence "through, under, and over the airspace and waters of the Arctic". Second, the policy aims to pursue "responsible Arctic region stewardship by conserving its resources". Third, the strategy seeks to intensify inter-state cooperation to promote "collective interests". While all three objectives surely advance US economic and military goals in the region, they hardly touch upon environmental concerns.

What is even more devastating, the policy document offers only one sentence where it explicitly acknowledges potentially destabilising impact of rapidly melting Arctic summer sea ice:

"These consequences include altering the climate of lower latitudes, risking the stability of Greenland's ice sheet, and accelerating the thawing of the Arctic permafrost in which large quantities of methane – a potent driver of climate change – as well as pollutants such as mercury are stored."

To address this hazard, the strategy promises to promote "supporting actions" which will assumingly advance "healthy, sustainable, and resilient ecosystems over the long term, supporting a full range of ecosystem services." However, the document does not specify what these "supporting actions" will entail. 

On a more general note, it can be argued that implementation of America's new Arctic strategy will dramatically accelerate the consumption of fossil fuel that has already led to carbon dioxide atmospheric concentrations reaching a record 400 parts per million. At this rate of increase in greenhouse gas emissions the planet will become 16 degrees Celsius hotter by 2100 which will ultimately make Earth uninhabitable. 

Thus, it can be suggested that the new US Arctic strategy is not only poorly-conceived and self-interested endeavor, but is also a profound hazard to humanity.