Climate change? My understanding is that all of the California fires were a combination of excess vegetation that had not been properly managed and a few cases of vandalized pg&e property. Talk radio stations discussed this at length each time.
> Climate wasn’t the only factor that is pushing PG&E to a likely bankruptcy. State regulations also played a role. PG&E is required to provide electrical service to the thousands of people moving annually in the state’s forested areas. Moreover, an unusual California state law, known as “inverse condemnation,” made PG&E liable if its equipment started a fire, regardless of whether it was negligent.
It seems PG&E was liable for a lot while it had limited ability to address the risk of damage from wildfire. I don't think they had any control over wildlife management but bore the brunt of the costs due to mismanagement. They also had their spending overseen by state regulators, which likely tied their hands:
> PG&E capital spending plans are overseen by state regulators, who pressed the company to spend more on tree trimming but not, until a few months ago, on other fire-prevention measures such as early-warning weather stations and insulated wires.
These policies to make companies liable for everything related to them plays well politically, but it just entrenches monopolies and abdicates blame from those responsible for preventing or limiting the damage of natural disasters.
Eh, the many years of unprecedented (in modern history) drought, higher temperatures, and higher winds most had an impact on how intense these fires burned and how far/fast they spread.
If you consider that the 200 years of record keeping we can rely on as fact, and then understand that the 200 years we have coverage for, just happen to be a really extraordinary period, your question is needling at perhaps the least valuable detail.
In fact, that detail is very obviously chosen for selfish reasons.
What percentage of that detail (the proportion of humanty’s fault and blame in evident destruction) would you say is selfish, versus merely rationally skeptical?
KGO and KSFO both discussed the fires in their news updates, providing details about the arson in each case. In the "camp" fire, there were thousands of bullet casings at the base of pg&e equipment. This vandalism has been happening all throughout the bay area. Linemen I spoke with said they believed it was a former pg&e employee, but that is just their opinion.
A similar vandalism occurred at a couple sub-stations, again with thousands of bullet casings found at the site. There was no vegetation, but the shooter knew which oil coolers to take out to destroy the sub-station. They also knew how to cut communication back to pg&e so they would not get the heat alarm.
The Napa fire was also believe to be arson. AFAIK, they caught 3 of the guys driving down to San Diego, but that went quiet really fast. I assumed they were trying to avoid copy-cat crimes.
For the news reporters on this thread, please consider calling KGO and KSFO to ask what information they have.
Lately? They've been active climate change deniers for several decades, and I don't know that they've improved from that reality denying stance recently.
