• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California throws lifeline to PG&E over potential Camp Fire liability

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
38,770
Reaction score
9,514
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From CBS News

California throws lifeline to PG&E over potential Camp Fire liability

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Shares of Pacific Gas & Electric soared Friday after California's top utility regulator said his agency will help the company deal with potentially crippling liability costs from wildfires.

Stock prices soared nearly 38 percent after plunging 60 percent and losing $15 billion in valuation in the week following the Northern California wildfire that is the nation's deadliest in a century.

No cause has been determined, but speculation has centered on PG&E, which reported an outage around the time and place the fire ignited. The death toll from the so-called Camp Fire has risen to at least 63, with hundreds of people still unaccounted for. California state investigators in June faulted PG&E-owned power lines for sparking a dozen blazes in Northern California in the fall of 2017 that killed 46 and incinerated nearly 9,000 homes and other structures.

Late Thursday, California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Picker sought to calm financial markets by indicating support for the continued viability of PG&E and other publicly traded utilities.

COMMENT:-

So PG&E is going to get to charge all customers extra in order to pay some customers for the damage caused by the negligence of PG&E (for which it isn't insured [which insurance it already charges all customers so that it will be able to pay some customers for damage suffered]).

But, not to worry, the California government has taken steps to ensure that the shareholders of PG&E don't suffer any loss due to declines in share prices.

In the words of Tommy Douglas "It's socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest of us.".
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
27,783
Reaction score
11,314
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Would you prefer PG&E go bankrupt and shut down?
 

Xelor

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
10,257
Reaction score
4,161
Location
Washington, D.C.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
From CBS News

California throws lifeline to PG&E over potential Camp Fire liability

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Shares of Pacific Gas & Electric soared Friday after California's top utility regulator said his agency will help the company deal with potentially crippling liability costs from wildfires.

Stock prices soared nearly 38 percent after plunging 60 percent and losing $15 billion in valuation in the week following the Northern California wildfire that is the nation's deadliest in a century.

No cause has been determined, but speculation has centered on PG&E, which reported an outage around the time and place the fire ignited. The death toll from the so-called Camp Fire has risen to at least 63, with hundreds of people still unaccounted for. California state investigators in June faulted PG&E-owned power lines for sparking a dozen blazes in Northern California in the fall of 2017 that killed 46 and incinerated nearly 9,000 homes and other structures.

Late Thursday, California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Picker sought to calm financial markets by indicating support for the continued viability of PG&E and other publicly traded utilities.

COMMENT:-

So PG&E is going to get to charge all customers extra in order to pay some customers for the damage caused by the negligence of PG&E (for which it isn't insured [which insurance it already charges all customers so that it will be able to pay some customers for damage suffered]).

But, not to worry, the California government has taken steps to ensure that the shareholders of PG&E don't suffer any loss due to declines in share prices.

In the words of Tommy Douglas "It's socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest of us.".
3-10-14_176628598_naturalgas.jpg


Red:
CA's "PUCO" pretty much has to do so. A state can't let a public utility cease to be a going concern. I mean, really. If the gas company goes out of business, residents and businesses don't get, guess what, gas.


Califorina specfic data are here: Natural Gas Consumption by End Use

Natural gas is used throughout the United States, but five states accounted for about 38% of total U.S. natural gas consumption in 2017:​

  • [*=left]Texas—14.3%
    [*=left]California—7.8%
    [*=left]Louisiana—5.9%
    [*=left]Florida—5.1%
    [*=left]Pennsylvania—4.7%
(Source)
 

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
What the hell you talkin' 'bout mon. It's the same as always. Socialism for the rich and an equal distribution of the liabilities to us peasants, pissants and peckerheads a/k/s John Q. Public. Corporate Welfare is alive and well. In this case I think it is a necessary evil.
/
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
65,171
Reaction score
31,940
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Would you prefer PG&E go bankrupt and shut down?

I'd prefer the state take it over and then become the energy infrastructure distributor. Then establish an energy trading platform that allows any company or any individual to be the producer of energy that they can then sell across this infrastructure across the state and then the state can sell any surplus to outside of the state.
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
65,171
Reaction score
31,940
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Decades of poor forest managment and a bunch of hard-headed environ-nazis who blame everything on global warming has caused most of this problem.

At least a bill was signed to supposedly improve the situation.

https://calmatters.org/articles/california-wildfire-prevention-bill-issues/

Why even bother posting? I mean you will type whatever trump last said now matter what the facts are.

I'm supposing your next comment will be that they should've "raked" the forest floors.
 
Last edited:

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
38,770
Reaction score
9,514
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Would you prefer PG&E go bankrupt and shut down?

That would be the preferred position of those who are arguing that the people who lost their homes due to the fire shouldn't receive any relief from the government because they didn't carry sufficient insurance.

Well, it would be if they were consistent.

However, their actual position is much more likely to be "That's DIFFERENT!!!".
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
38,770
Reaction score
9,514
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
3-10-14_176628598_naturalgas.jpg


Red:
CA's "PUCO" pretty much has to do so. A state can't let a public utility cease to be a going concern. I mean, really. If the gas company goes out of business, residents and businesses don't get, guess what, gas.


Califorina specfic data are here: Natural Gas Consumption by End Use

Natural gas is used throughout the United States, but five states accounted for about 38% of total U.S. natural gas consumption in 2017:​

  • [*=left]Texas—14.3%
    [*=left]California—7.8%
    [*=left]Louisiana—5.9%
    [*=left]Florida—5.1%
    [*=left]Pennsylvania—4.7%
(Source)

Have you ever thought about the possibility that the PUBLIC just might be better off if a PUBLIC utility was owned by the PUBLIC and operated for the benefit of the PUBLIC?
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
38,770
Reaction score
9,514
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I'd prefer the state take it over and then become the energy infrastructure distributor. Then establish an energy trading platform that allows any company or any individual to be the producer of energy that they can then sell across this infrastructure across the state and then the state can sell any surplus to outside of the state.

Isn't that awful close to "S - * - C - * - * -L - * - S - M"?

I mean, look how much of their personal money that the owners of PG&E spent to create that gas and electricity so that they would have something to distribute.
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
65,171
Reaction score
31,940
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Isn't that awful close to "S - * - C - * - * -L - * - S - M"?

Not really. It's owning infrastructure but not any means of production. Freeing up actual competition on the power lines rather than the power-lines being owned by the same energy production company creating a monopoly. This makes it more capitalist than it currently is.

Energy producers would then of course have to pay a fee/rent for selling across the lines to keep them maintained and upgraded... which would be done by private sector contracts.
 

Xelor

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
10,257
Reaction score
4,161
Location
Washington, D.C.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Have you ever thought about the possibility that the PUBLIC just might be better off if a PUBLIC utility was owned by the PUBLIC and operated for the benefit of the PUBLIC?

Who owns it is irrelevant to the fact of calamity resulting from a current one ceasing to be a going concern.

Remember what I wrote:
CA's "PUCO" pretty much has to do so. A state can't let a public utility cease to be a going concern. I mean, really. If the gas company goes out of business, residents and businesses don't get, guess what, gas.
 

joko104

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
64,659
Reaction score
22,738
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
Why even bother posting? I mean you will type whatever trump last said now matter what the facts are.

I'm supposing your next comment will be that they should've "raked" the forest floors.

Clearing out dead trees, fire lanes and selected burns - like those states that actually manage their forests do.

However, since California wants it all purely natural, the fires are natural and therefore should be celebrated as nature is doing what nature does to clean up forests. The fire fighters should be banned as they are acting in opposition to nature.
 

joko104

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
64,659
Reaction score
22,738
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
I'd prefer the state take it over and then become the energy infrastructure distributor. Then establish an energy trading platform that allows any company or any individual to be the producer of energy that they can then sell across this infrastructure across the state and then the state can sell any surplus to outside of the state.

You mean like now?
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
65,171
Reaction score
31,940
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Clearing out dead trees, fire lanes and selected burns - like those states that actually manage their forests do.

However, since California wants it all purely natural, the fires are natural and therefore should be celebrated as nature is doing what nature does to clean up forests. The fire fighters should be banned as they are acting in opposition to nature.

Did the fire just burn state land only?
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
39,520
Reaction score
21,252
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Decades of poor forest managment and a bunch of hard-headed environ-nazis who blame everything on global warming has caused most of this problem.

At least a bill was signed to supposedly improve the situation.

https://calmatters.org/articles/california-wildfire-prevention-bill-issues/

I keep reading that term in this context and don't understand it. Forest management? How the hell do you manage a forest? I mean, okay, I'm on 21 acres and I understand woodlot management but a forest? BC is about a million square klicks, California about a half-million. How do you manage a forest that's tens of thousands of square miles?
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
65,171
Reaction score
31,940
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I keep reading that term in this context and don't understand it. Forest management? How the hell do you manage a forest? I mean, okay, I'm on 21 acres and I understand woodlot management but a forest? BC is about a million square klicks, California about a half-million. How do you manage a forest that's tens of thousands of square miles?

And the state doesn't exactly "manage" national forests. They are just desperate to **** on California for not being conservative. Bunch of unamerican asshats such folks are.
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
39,520
Reaction score
21,252
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
And the state doesn't exactly "manage" national forests. They are just desperate to **** on California for not being conservative. Bunch of unamerican asshats.

Some people have no idea of the scale of the problem. I remember when Fort McMurray was burned a couple years ago there was a guy here saying Canadians just need to learn to cut back all the trees from around town.
Speaking of which, why have so many people died in California? Were they not warned early enough, or did they ignore the warnings? In Fort McMurray, with one road in and out of town, only two people died and that was in a car accident during the evacuation.
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
65,171
Reaction score
31,940
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Some people have no idea of the scale of the problem. I remember when Fort McMurray was burned a couple years ago there was a guy here saying Canadians just need to learn to cut back all the trees from around town.
Speaking of which, why have so many people died in California? Were they not warned early enough, or did they ignore the warnings? In Fort McMurray, with one road in and out of town, only two people died and that was in a car accident during the evacuation.

I dunno. I think there will be a huge report trying to figure that out when all is clear.
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
39,520
Reaction score
21,252
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
I dunno. I think there will be a huge report trying to figure that out when all is clear.

Somebody screwed up. I keep seeing scenes from Paradise, Cal. on the news and being reminded of Kurt Vonnegut's telling of being a POW in Dresden in an underground slaughterhouse facility called Slaughterhouse 5, and all the prisoners were brought above ground after the firebombing to be what he called 'corpse miners', digging through burned-out buildings for incinerated corpses.
I wonder if the warnings were ignored. If that's the case it'll be doubly tragic if families were killed because of a misguided decision by someone who had no understanding when he decided he knew better.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
27,783
Reaction score
11,314
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'd prefer the state take it over and then become the energy infrastructure distributor. Then establish an energy trading platform that allows any company or any individual to be the producer of energy that they can then sell across this infrastructure across the state and then the state can sell any surplus to outside of the state.

Interesting concept.

You do realize that CA gets energy from other States. CA has no surpluss energy. AZ Palo Verde Plant is one source CA gets electricity from.
 

jet57

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
31,057
Reaction score
3,969
Location
not here
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
From CBS News

California throws lifeline to PG&E over potential Camp Fire liability

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Shares of Pacific Gas & Electric soared Friday after California's top utility regulator said his agency will help the company deal with potentially crippling liability costs from wildfires.

Stock prices soared nearly 38 percent after plunging 60 percent and losing $15 billion in valuation in the week following the Northern California wildfire that is the nation's deadliest in a century.

No cause has been determined, but speculation has centered on PG&E, which reported an outage around the time and place the fire ignited. The death toll from the so-called Camp Fire has risen to at least 63, with hundreds of people still unaccounted for. California state investigators in June faulted PG&E-owned power lines for sparking a dozen blazes in Northern California in the fall of 2017 that killed 46 and incinerated nearly 9,000 homes and other structures.

Late Thursday, California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Picker sought to calm financial markets by indicating support for the continued viability of PG&E and other publicly traded utilities.

COMMENT:-

So PG&E is going to get to charge all customers extra in order to pay some customers for the damage caused by the negligence of PG&E (for which it isn't insured [which insurance it already charges all customers so that it will be able to pay some customers for damage suffered]).

But, not to worry, the California government has taken steps to ensure that the shareholders of PG&E don't suffer any loss due to declines in share prices.

In the words of Tommy Douglas "It's socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest of us.".

Yeah I heard that too. PG&E however is on legal probation from last year, and was real pissed at Brown for signing a bill that would have us eat the costs, but again, that was tagged to last year only. PG&E is on the full hook for this year. I don't know how much the PUC is going to be able to help as the company says that their insurance won't be able to cover the costs.
 
Top Bottom