ruffrecords
Well-known member
Best wishes to the reported 180,000 people ordered to leave Santa Rosa. I spent many happy days visiting there back in the 90s.
Cheers
Ian
Cheers
Ian
Californian wild fires
- Thread starter ruffrecords
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
pucho812
Well-known member
Yes. It's getting nuts and they just had major fire issues in the last couple of years. I know people who live up there and wish them the best of luck, hopefully they are all o.k. in the end.
We have had 2 fires break out about 1 mile from my abode in Los Angeles. While I am on the north end of town, there is sprawling metropolis all around. The one last week happen to be in a flood basin/park area that ended up burning 60 acres and was about a mile from my place. It was started by a homeless encampment. We just had another break out this early morning again about a mile or so from my place but this time on the hillside of the interstate(405) and it's highway intersection. So for the latter is quite serious. Our current state of affairs has been that most fires are started by either the power grid + winds and or encampments + winds. It's that time of year where we have high winds. The current remedy has been to shut down the grid on high risk days. It's pretty crazy. But the encampments, no one is really doing anything about them. While I do feel for their plight, leaving a fire going while sleeping is a recipe for disaster.
We have had 2 fires break out about 1 mile from my abode in Los Angeles. While I am on the north end of town, there is sprawling metropolis all around. The one last week happen to be in a flood basin/park area that ended up burning 60 acres and was about a mile from my place. It was started by a homeless encampment. We just had another break out this early morning again about a mile or so from my place but this time on the hillside of the interstate(405) and it's highway intersection. So for the latter is quite serious. Our current state of affairs has been that most fires are started by either the power grid + winds and or encampments + winds. It's that time of year where we have high winds. The current remedy has been to shut down the grid on high risk days. It's pretty crazy. But the encampments, no one is really doing anything about them. While I do feel for their plight, leaving a fire going while sleeping is a recipe for disaster.
Winston OBoogie
Well-known member
Stay safe any and all who live or work in the area affected.
I lived in Piedmont in the Oakland hills during the October 1991 firestorm. We evacuated to Marin and, from the ongoing news reports, fully expected to come back to a destroyed home. We were lucky, over 3000 homes, spreading right up to the edge of our street were gone when we returned. And of course there were the poor souls who perished that day.
I'm holding good thoughts for you guys.
I lived in Piedmont in the Oakland hills during the October 1991 firestorm. We evacuated to Marin and, from the ongoing news reports, fully expected to come back to a destroyed home. We were lucky, over 3000 homes, spreading right up to the edge of our street were gone when we returned. And of course there were the poor souls who perished that day.
I'm holding good thoughts for you guys.
I wonder if there is an affordable way to make those distribution lines safer (less prone to start fires), cheaper than burying them?
It seems there is a false economy to not manage to forests more effectively.
JR
It seems there is a false economy to not manage to forests more effectively.
JR
JohnRoberts said:
i dont give flying F&^%# k if there is a cheaper way to do it or not... they have to do it, they are making ton of profit and the government must enforce it... not especially current governor is to blame but all past governors are guilty as hell for not caring, but giving permits...
i am paying 50$ a month just for clean electricity to Edison at marina del rey/CA + what i use....
if there is even a small spark, all my neighbors /community are going after edison to cook them, including local authorities for giving them permits !
JohnRoberts said:
yes, but they end up with more land to build houses... old trick to burn forest etc!
we were going to rent a house with garage, so i could set up a studio(i posted here the garage studio idea)
when i checked the wiring and the fuse box, it was ancient 1930s wiring with super unsafe dangling fuse box... and the owner made major changes to house... they would never give me any of those permits....
but guess what.... owner couple were also at marina del rey local authority! this is how things are working just like any other corrupt country!
Amazing Santa Anna winds are blowing hot and dry till January before rains show up in CA. In Colo we had hot September and cold October with lots of powder snow and expect -3 degrees F. Tonight. It’s January kind of cold. Wish I could send it out to CA. Should be great for skiing.
I don’t know this for a fact, but I have been told by people who probably ought to know that environmental regulations in CA make it very difficult for the transmission guys to effectively manage the growth around their transmission lines.JohnRoberts said:
I think it's a combination of things, as all situations complex...
There are some rather stupid environmental laws affecting brush and cutting it back for safety vs. "Natural growth" sort of bullshit...my former son-in-law is a Forest Service Hot shot...fights wildfires for a living...many years back when the Santa Ana winds were wrecking havoc in the ElCajon/San Diego forest areas he was up in the hills fighting fires came across a property owner who's house was the only one standing after a burn rushed through, asked him why his house was still there...he said "I cut back all the growth within 100 yards around my house and got fined $1000.00 for it, but now my house is still standing and I consider it money well spent"...so there are some dumb
"Environment->>>>DMZ<<<<-houses"laws that are based on bad impact ideas all over the state...
But also there is PG&E's culpability here...they were ordered by a judge over 10 years ago to spend money upgrading the system, and instead they "saved" the stockholders a bunch of money and those guys took it out in shares/etc...so they have NOT been upgrading old lines/etc where high winds impact and can use environmental impact excuses to cover their asses... this is where the local rules vs a judges ruling gets in the way...PG&E do NOT show a profit because they move the money around in ways that are deceptive...my oldest is a DA in Oroville...she lives 15 miles form the Paradise fire...so she saw the impact up close, dug into the "WHY"...if PG&E had cut the power last year=no paradise fire....but it was bad PR and they were in front of another judge for other compensation for other fires...
How PG&E remains a corporation is also some rather illegal bullshit...someone somewhere is getting paid to keep them from going under, and its not someone who is an employee...
There are some rather stupid environmental laws affecting brush and cutting it back for safety vs. "Natural growth" sort of bullshit...my former son-in-law is a Forest Service Hot shot...fights wildfires for a living...many years back when the Santa Ana winds were wrecking havoc in the ElCajon/San Diego forest areas he was up in the hills fighting fires came across a property owner who's house was the only one standing after a burn rushed through, asked him why his house was still there...he said "I cut back all the growth within 100 yards around my house and got fined $1000.00 for it, but now my house is still standing and I consider it money well spent"...so there are some dumb
"Environment->>>>DMZ<<<<-houses"laws that are based on bad impact ideas all over the state...
But also there is PG&E's culpability here...they were ordered by a judge over 10 years ago to spend money upgrading the system, and instead they "saved" the stockholders a bunch of money and those guys took it out in shares/etc...so they have NOT been upgrading old lines/etc where high winds impact and can use environmental impact excuses to cover their asses... this is where the local rules vs a judges ruling gets in the way...PG&E do NOT show a profit because they move the money around in ways that are deceptive...my oldest is a DA in Oroville...she lives 15 miles form the Paradise fire...so she saw the impact up close, dug into the "WHY"...if PG&E had cut the power last year=no paradise fire....but it was bad PR and they were in front of another judge for other compensation for other fires...
How PG&E remains a corporation is also some rather illegal bullshit...someone somewhere is getting paid to keep them from going under, and its not someone who is an employee...
pucho812
Well-known member
dogears said:
that seems to be a common comment, I am certain there is truth to it.
pucho812
Well-known member
more to California then just wild fires
https://kfiam640.iheart.com/content/2019-06-20-california-has-become-americas-first-third-world-state/
https://kfiam640.iheart.com/content/2019-06-20-california-has-become-americas-first-third-world-state/
ruffrecords
Well-known member
pucho812 said:
It is easy to write inflammatory articles. I am not trying to minimise the problem but I suspect one reason California has 22% of the USA's homeless is simply because of the warm weather.
Cheers
Ian
pucho812
Well-known member
ruffrecords said:
indeed
+1 my brother lives out there and shared that he gets fined for cutting back brush.iomegaman said:
I think it's a local ordinance not state, but still bat sh__ crazy.
JR
Do y'all not know that PG&E is a regulated utility? The state literally mandates the profit they can make, there is a mandated rate of return. The public utility commission decides what they can invest in, how much, what they can charge, and what their profits can be. They have to get approval to upgrade lines, and those plans get reviewed and approved, and ultimately passed on in rates to electricity buyers. If PG&E hasn't invested, the PUC is at fault, not PG&E. They have to do whatever the PUC says.
California as a system - public and private - has wholly and completely mismanaged their grid. There's a reason Californians pay more for electricity than anyone else and ridiculously bad service. It isn't because utilities, even regulated transmission companies, are a bad idea or evil. They seem to work better everywhere else.
The idea that PG&E is owned by a bunch of evil money-grubbing fat cats is ridiculous too. It's a publicly traded company, most of it is owned by institutional investors and mutual funds. If you own Vanguard mutual funds, you're likely to have some exposure.
For them, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Cut power and you're evil and blackmailing; don't cut power and get blamed for the fire, or even more confusingly get held liable for millions and millions in damage. What do people expect is going to happen? A regulated utility is a monopoly, you might as well think of them as an incentivized piece of the government. Suing them or holding them liable is a shakedown of citizens by citizens. It's nonsensical.
It'd be funny to watch if it wasn't so sad.
California as a system - public and private - has wholly and completely mismanaged their grid. There's a reason Californians pay more for electricity than anyone else and ridiculously bad service. It isn't because utilities, even regulated transmission companies, are a bad idea or evil. They seem to work better everywhere else.
The idea that PG&E is owned by a bunch of evil money-grubbing fat cats is ridiculous too. It's a publicly traded company, most of it is owned by institutional investors and mutual funds. If you own Vanguard mutual funds, you're likely to have some exposure.
For them, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Cut power and you're evil and blackmailing; don't cut power and get blamed for the fire, or even more confusingly get held liable for millions and millions in damage. What do people expect is going to happen? A regulated utility is a monopoly, you might as well think of them as an incentivized piece of the government. Suing them or holding them liable is a shakedown of citizens by citizens. It's nonsensical.
It'd be funny to watch if it wasn't so sad.
This is all boilerplate...let me give you an example...dogears said:
I have been a project manager on several multi-million dollar government contracts...by LAW the profit margin is set and must be included in the bid number...%5...so EVERY contractor who bids must play by the rules and show the profit, which cannot be more than %5...bidding day is a circus...project managers on multiple phones as the moment before the bids get submitted in an open meeting...calling suppliers and subs to make sure the best possible number is submitted...highly competitive...UNTIL the bid is awarded...
Then comes what we call "the buyout"...its when we go back to our subs and say "Hey we won the contract, but we need you to do better on your numbers or we will go with someone else" (most bids have several options for subcontractors)...so the HVAC guy who gave us a bid of $50k will drop his price to $46K...because its guaranteed work, guaranteed pay its Fed money, no brainer...
We do this with EVERY subcontractor and EVERY supplier...that 5% profit just got rolled up to 15%...in one day...happens all the time, pretty well documented, but the LEGAL document that shows the actual profit number will only show 5%...and there is absolutely nothing in the rules that says a contractor cannot do this, happens ALL the time...the government gets its paperwork showing ONLY 5% profit and the contractor now has money to move around with and get the job done...
So when someone tells me the "profit is a fixed number determined by the authority" I just kinda smile because I know good and well it does not tell the actual story of where the profit really is or even how much it is...
If you think low level Federal contracts (5-10 million) is the only place this happens I have a bridge to sell you...
I can assure you that in spite of what they must report as "profit" PG&E has managed to pay out some serious dividends to their shareholders and it's all legitimate...what we call profit and what their accountants call profit are probably two very different things.
Right, so you’re outlining the problem with regulation. Is that the company’s fault or the result of bad laws, bad regulation?
Let me put it another way. Regulated utilities are everywhere in the US. Why are all these problems limited to California? (And to some extent NYC).
Texas and Florida both have extremely large power demand, extremely difficult load requirements to due to climate, and yet they don’t suffer brownouts and blackouts. Is it because companies here don’t try to make money? Or...?
The problem in California is Californian government, Californian voters AND Californian companies. Blaming it on the big bad corporation plays well as political red meat but it’s no good to anyone who can think critically.
It wouldn’t surprise me if the whole thing ends up being made into an extension of the state government. Then we’ll really see some high rates, bloat, and poor service. :
Let me put it another way. Regulated utilities are everywhere in the US. Why are all these problems limited to California? (And to some extent NYC).
Texas and Florida both have extremely large power demand, extremely difficult load requirements to due to climate, and yet they don’t suffer brownouts and blackouts. Is it because companies here don’t try to make money? Or...?
The problem in California is Californian government, Californian voters AND Californian companies. Blaming it on the big bad corporation plays well as political red meat but it’s no good to anyone who can think critically.
It wouldn’t surprise me if the whole thing ends up being made into an extension of the state government. Then we’ll really see some high rates, bloat, and poor service. :
Also, you make it out like PG&E paying dividends is bad. Here’s their dividend history. I don’t see anything untoward here?
https://www.streetinsider.com/dividend_history.php?q=PCG
The whole idea of a regulated utility is that they DO make money, to encourage capital to flow to these large projects. That’s the whole “deal.” It’s not the same at all as a federal bid contract - those are competitive. PG&E has a granted monopoly.
https://www.streetinsider.com/dividend_history.php?q=PCG
The whole idea of a regulated utility is that they DO make money, to encourage capital to flow to these large projects. That’s the whole “deal.” It’s not the same at all as a federal bid contract - those are competitive. PG&E has a granted monopoly.
Are you saying that you as a project manager go back and renegotiate "kick backs" from sub contractors? I do not doubt that this happens but it does not sound ethical or completely legal. If this is standard practice the subs will just pad their initial quotes so they can afford to give some back when the out stretched hand later arrives. This sounds like textbook corruption. If this is concealed from the federal government funding the project it is a fraud against them and ultimately us tax payers.iomegaman said:
Utilities are heavily regulated quasi monopolies. CA power utilities have an extra layer of legislative constraints about fraction of energy purchased being renewable or green. As a public corporation PG&Es finances are audited and documented.
CA has unique weather patterns (hot, dry, Santa Ana winds from the desert). But forest (fuel) management is still the dominant contributor to fire problems. The Reagan Library was just threatened by the Easy fire, but survived unscathed mostly due to conservative undergrowth and tree management. They allow goats to eat the underbrush removing that potential fuel, and keep trees away from the structure so they don't provide fuel for fire to reach them.
I wouldn't be surprised if lax forest management is allowed to continue so the state government can gain more control over another aspect of the local economy, or maybe they are just that incompetent (perhaps a little of both).
JR
