PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires • Hacker News Board

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#41

Post by jdavis703 » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:28 AM UTC

tathougies wrote: post #15

lacker wrote: post #2

It seems like an odd quirk of liability law that all of the fire damage is blamed on PG+E if the initial spark that started the fire was PG+E’s fault. Surely some blame lies elsewhere as well. I think homeowners need to be paying fire insurance costs proportional to fire risk to properly incentivize fire protection (and I say this as a California homeowner in a somewhat fire prone area). In the end, PG+E is regulated…

Fire insurance, like earthquake and flood insurance, does not work because of the scope of damages. Insurance works by pooling risk and taking income from low risk areas to pay for high risk ones. Due to the scope of wildfires, fire insurance is untenable. The solution to this fire is absolutely to blame pg and e and its custoners (yes this includes me). This is the logical conclusion. The only thing preventing us fr…

I live just a couple of miles from the Hayward fault which is "scheduled" to unleash an M7 earthquake any day now. My insurance costs (which includes earthquake and fire) is about $25/month with a $500 deductible. If a $25/month charge is "untenable" I think people have bigger financial problems than affording insurance.

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#42

Post by williamscales » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:37 AM UTC

lacker wrote: post #2

It seems like an odd quirk of liability law that all of the fire damage is blamed on PG+E if the initial spark that started the fire was PG+E’s fault. Surely some blame lies elsewhere as well. I think homeowners need to be paying fire insurance costs proportional to fire risk to properly incentivize fire protection (and I say this as a California homeowner in a somewhat fire prone area). In the end, PG+E is regulated…

> Surely some blame lies elsewhere as well.

I saw a picture of Paradise after it burned. It was remarkable, the houses were completely gone but the trees were still standing all around. There's something wrong with how we build and maintain our structures in fire prone areas.

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#43

Post by paul7986 » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:42 AM UTC

paul7986 wrote: post #22

lacker wrote: post #2

It seems like an odd quirk of liability law that all of the fire damage is blamed on PG+E if the initial spark that started the fire was PG+E’s fault. Surely some blame lies elsewhere as well. I think homeowners need to be paying fire insurance costs proportional to fire risk to properly incentivize fire protection (and I say this as a California homeowner in a somewhat fire prone area). In the end, PG+E is regulated…

California the land of sky high housing & rent, insane deadly forest fires, homelessness like no other state, landslides, earthquakes... it just doesn't sound very appealing. What are the positives ... chasing and potentially realizing your creative (music/film) or tech dreams there? That can be done in other cities like Nashville or possibly close to here in a few years with Amazon building in Crystal City, VA (othe…

Hmmmm i was seriously asking in a nice way as I don't live in California.

I've only been there for vacations, competing on a reality tv show and an unpleasant meeting with Google re: buying one of my apps.

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#44

Post by tathougies » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:46 AM UTC

saltedonion wrote: post #21

tathougies wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fire insurance, like earthquake and flood insurance, does not work because of the scope of damages. Insurance works by pooling risk and taking income from low risk areas to pay for high risk ones. Due to the scope of wildfires, fire insurance is untenable. The solution to this fire is absolutely to blame pg and e and its custoners (yes this includes me). This is the logical conclusion. The only thing preventing us fr…

Can you explain why wild fire insurance is not tenable? Here in Canada all home insurance include wildfire insurance. All insurers have to do is to pool risk and diversify across geography. No way only California has homes near forests? There’s also reinsurers to pool even more risk.

Why would someone in Oregon (where there is abundant water) or Louisiana purchase wildfire (specific) insurance?

Home insurance includes wildfires, but let's limit ourselves to wildfire-specific insurance, which was the issue at hand.

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#45

Post by harikb » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:47 AM UTC

dangjc wrote: post #16

If someone pours gasoline over everything, but someone else lights the match, why do we put all the blame on the match lighter? Building flammable homes right next to super dry, brush filled forests is just an invitation for disaster.

If no homes were destroyed and people didn't die, there is nobody at fault?

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#46

Post by jtmcmc » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:52 AM UTC

paul7986 wrote: post #43

paul7986 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California the land of sky high housing & rent, insane deadly forest fires, homelessness like no other state, landslides, earthquakes... it just doesn't sound very appealing. What are the positives ... chasing and potentially realizing your creative (music/film) or tech dreams there? That can be done in other cities like Nashville or possibly close to here in a few years with Amazon building in Crystal City, VA (othe…

Hmmmm i was seriously asking in a nice way as I don't live in California. I've only been there for vacations, competing on a reality tv show and an unpleasant meeting with Google re: buying one of my apps.

you were in no way asking in a nice way. You were incredibly condescending in a post about a natural disaster striking the area. Don't be disingenuous.

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#47

Post by _fq4v » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:52 AM UTC

bluejekyll wrote: post #26

tathougies wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fire insurance, like earthquake and flood insurance, does not work because of the scope of damages. Insurance works by pooling risk and taking income from low risk areas to pay for high risk ones. Due to the scope of wildfires, fire insurance is untenable. The solution to this fire is absolutely to blame pg and e and its custoners (yes this includes me). This is the logical conclusion. The only thing preventing us fr…

> The solution furthermore is to legislate to remove the barriers to competition that California has set up. While I think you’re generally on point, this misses the mark a bit. We don’t want more transmission lines running in CA, right? We don’t want lots of little companies increasing the risk of fire by managing lines independently and the one that’s losing then doesn’t have the means to maintain those lines. We m…

> We might want competition at the generation point, but the transmission lines should be a monopoly.

A perfectly reasonable argument.

If a certain market needs to be a monopoly, then it ought to be state controlled, like the FCC's monopoly on air waves. That is the only way to ensure free-market capitalism.

The purpose of the market is to create an efficient society. Indeed, it is the best vehicle to do so. However, a market means that there is choice.

In the absence of a market, the next best alternative is democratic control, best exercised via government.

> We don’t want more transmission lines running in CA, right?

Not in the air. Luckily, you can put them under ground.

> The last three disasters caused by PG&E,

This is willful ignorance. I'd be happy to look over companies that simply had maintenance issues. However, PG&E has proven to not only be negligent, but malicious. They've poisoned people knowingly, without disclosure. They've covered up negligence over the explosions of city blocks.

I am not anti-business. Despite its many issues, Southern California edison is a much better company.

PG&E though is -- quite obviously -- quite a bit more nefarious than most utilities.

> competition in transmission is bad.

No it's not. Competition would always be good. Your argument was that competition in transmission was not possible.

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#48

Post by tathougies » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:53 AM UTC

cronix wrote: post #19

tathougies wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fire insurance, like earthquake and flood insurance, does not work because of the scope of damages. Insurance works by pooling risk and taking income from low risk areas to pay for high risk ones. Due to the scope of wildfires, fire insurance is untenable. The solution to this fire is absolutely to blame pg and e and its custoners (yes this includes me). This is the logical conclusion. The only thing preventing us fr…

> fire insurance is untenable How do the insurance companies afford to insure places like in Florida and the lower East Coast, which seem to keep getting hammered with hurricanes year after year, getting worse year after year? And... can they keep up this pace? Apparently in 2017, fires "only" cost insurance companies ~$14B, out of ~$132B paid out. The majority was caused by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. 2017 w…

Government subsidy?

And, as I said above, wildfire is covered in home insurance policies. However, the argument was about wildfire specific insurance. That is untenable since it would cause large insurance runs every year.

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#49

Post by tathougies » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:56 AM UTC

r00fus wrote: post #17

tathougies wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fire insurance, like earthquake and flood insurance, does not work because of the scope of damages. Insurance works by pooling risk and taking income from low risk areas to pay for high risk ones. Due to the scope of wildfires, fire insurance is untenable. The solution to this fire is absolutely to blame pg and e and its custoners (yes this includes me). This is the logical conclusion. The only thing preventing us fr…

What about the Federal government for cutting the funding for existing CA fire programs? Funding was cut last year and boom we have back to back years of fires.

This is a strawman. I do not like the current administration, but attempting to blame everything on them is intellectually lazy.

The fires in California are not caused due to bad budget cuts over the past few years, but rather the mistaken environmentalist policy of not allowing controlled burns for the last 100 years and extinguishing natural fires out of needless heroics to save species that are now in ever more need of saving: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/californ...

Re: PG&E-friendly wildfire bill being prepared by lawmakers in wake of lethal fires

#50

Post by nitwit005 » Wed, Nov 21, 2018, 5:58 AM UTC

paul7986 wrote: post #22

lacker wrote: post #2

It seems like an odd quirk of liability law that all of the fire damage is blamed on PG+E if the initial spark that started the fire was PG+E’s fault. Surely some blame lies elsewhere as well. I think homeowners need to be paying fire insurance costs proportional to fire risk to properly incentivize fire protection (and I say this as a California homeowner in a somewhat fire prone area). In the end, PG+E is regulated…

California the land of sky high housing & rent, insane deadly forest fires, homelessness like no other state, landslides, earthquakes... it just doesn't sound very appealing. What are the positives ... chasing and potentially realizing your creative (music/film) or tech dreams there? That can be done in other cities like Nashville or possibly close to here in a few years with Amazon building in Crystal City, VA (othe…

Why would you live in the united states? It has fires, tornadoes, earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, landslides, volcanoes, tsunamis, blizzards, heat waves, droughts...

If you list all the disasters in a big area, your list gets big fast, but no individual place actually has all those things, unless perhaps if Moses shows up to intimidate a Pharaoh.