One person floods a basement with gasoline. Another comes in and throws a lit match on the floor. Who’s responsible for the fire? It’s an interesting question.
At the same time, while it’s statisticslly likely that fires would happen with our without PG&E, we can’t escape the fact that they’ve been responsible for quite a few of them.
Paradise, California, was built very close to the wildlife-urban interface. And our federal forest management practices should be questioned. But, PG&E knew about the specific faulty equipment that ended up sparking the Camp fire.
Why didn’t they prioritize fixing equipment in a dry forest adjacent to a populated area? Why did they pay dividends if so much infrastructure was failing?
They’d have a much easier case to make if they could at least show an attempt to prioritize maintenance, especially in high risk areas. Then we could all say, “accidents happen.” But there’s a pattern with PG&E.
When people die on a highway because of human error, or an “act of god”, it’s one thing. Just as we should except that a massive utility will never have a 0% failure rate. But when a bridge collapses, and people knew the bridge was at risk of collapse, and dividends were paid instead of spending every available dollar on upgrades...