The TV series is in Amazon Prime. I just watched the first episode, and really liked it. At least in the series I think Borlu is reasonably fleshed up.
In any case, the series seems quite good. I look forward to seeing the remaining episodes.
With newer technology used today, 40% is in the very low end of onshore wind being built today, though 30-40 % is right (for now) for solar.
Offshore wind produces way above 50%, and it’s significantly more reliable. Regretfully, in practice, the Jones Act makes it impossible to build offshore wind in the USA. Just one more thing the Jones Act is fishing us with.
(If Tulsi had wanted a cause that could propel her in the nomination, she should have seized the Jones Act. Hawai’i is the state most fished up by the Jones Act, even more than Puerto Rico (though PR doesn’t have EVs so it doesn’t count for fish). The Texas Gulf Coast oil industry is up there too (hey Senator Rafael Eduardo, do something for your state for a change, instead of looking for things your state can do for you))
In real life (like, having worked in power generation for close to 30 years), I can’t make an economic case for nuclear power that adds all the costs associated with it. Most of which no one even mentions:
Like...
- Disposal of fuel residues
- Decommissioning and cleanup of the site (what, did you think the plant will be there one hundred years from now?)
- Insurance. Nuclear power in not insurable in the commercial reinsurance markets
- Financing and cost overruns protections (I.e. no matter the final costs, the tariff will be adjusted to make the plant profitable enough to service debt) or loan guarantees.
- Accident clean up costs.
Plus, the large size of nuclear power plants (to squeeze the last possible economy of scale possible), and their must-run characteristics (not only they can’t cycle up and down following the load, they can’t easily be turned off and on either) create further operational issues
- The grid has to carry large generation reserves (for those days when nuclear is off for maintenance) which are rarely used, but have to be paid off by customers too (he, another externality).
- Lastly, for now, nuclear requires large (and expensive) transmission systems to distribute all that energy. More distributed generation would be far easier to manage, more reliable, and much cheaper to move around.
I would agree that many of these issues could be avoided if somehow there were commercial small nuclear plants, similar to those in nuclear powered vessels. I do not know what are the technical and economic reasons why no one in the world has, to my knowledge, built one such small (let’s say 50 MW) nuclear plant. But, 1GW nuclear plants only make economic sense to investors if the public bears almost all the risks. Not even Apple, Shell, or Aramco, could survive Fukushima.
Im only familiar with California, but renewable generators do not get a state subsidy in CA. What you have is a mandate that utilities buy X% of renewable energy.
Which obviously, is a big thing, but it’s not a cash subsidy.
Last Christmas, the 22 y.o. son of friends I was staying with decided that a turntable would be “the” gift for his girlfriend.
His father and I watched him assemble the thing (it came out in pieces, apparently you can’t ship an assembled turntable via Amazon and have it survive the trip), and then the dad grudgingly agreed to find out some old L.Ps from the attic.
Hilarity ensued when we all realized the son, born in the late 90s, hadn’t actually touched an L.P. In his life, much less played one. It took a couple of hours to walk him on how to handle the LP (from the edge), how to raise and drop the needle (with the little lever, and not your hand), that the dark bands in the vinyl separate the different songs, that no, you can’t (*) seek a particular track with a fast forward button, that unless you are a trained DJ you don’t touch the LP when it’s turning, that the lyrics are printed in the box.
Equally funny was watching the boy repeat the lesson to his girlfriend on Christmas Day (with his dad correcting him when he had something wrong.
And for us it was a bit shocking that something that was as common air when we were growing up had completely disappeared to the point our adult children had never been exposed to it.
(*) yes, I know certain fancy 80s turntables had detectors that could recognize the track dividers (most of the time). I had one of those. The guy in the history’s turntable didn’t have that feature.
I’m not saying the good doctor (whose posts I miss terribly) is bluffing.
I’m saying he’s probably venting in frustration because he can’t have done the math, because no practitioner can do the math yet.
The good doctor can calculate how much the practice’s revenue will go down, because he knows how many patients he treats, and how much M4A will pay.
But he doesn’t know how much his operating costs will go down by reducing the costs of managing billing to insurance companies. These costs are far from trivial. He doesn’t know what will be the billing costs for his practice under M4A
So the good doctor can’t know yet if his practice will, at the end of the day, be less or more profitable, and by how much.
Medical billing specialists are doomed under M4A. But they are doomed under any change of the current system, be it the UK system, the German system, the French system.
But doctors might even come ahead. Right know, neither we nor them know.
You are right, the AMA’s supply restrictions are a non trivial part of the health care cost problem, by rationing the licensing of practitioners. But, like with engineers (example: me), there’s nothing inherently wrong on how doctors are trained in many parts of the world, from Canada, to Mexico, to Japan, to China, to Israel, to Western Europe.
So I don’t find anything inherently wrong with allowing foreign doctors to go through a licensing process even if they trained in a foreign university.
I’ve heard you say this several times, and my follow up question (to you and Dr. Saunders) is
“Shutter the clinics and do what? Learn to code?”
I am asking this in all earnest. Are doctors so rich that they will just retire and live from their wealth (better use it before Elizabeth Warren takes it away).
In real life, doctors, and the doctors market, will accommodate the change.
Others have already pointed out that clinic’s costs will go down because the insurance billing and insurance compliance functions will be reduced to a small fraction of what they are, so both revenues and costs will fall (who will fall the most is unclear right now).
Doctors might make less money than now, but most professionals, and almost all non college educated people make less than doctors do, and still can raise their families. To the extent that the new structure makes it impossible for doctors to service their own student loans, which are massive, and out of proportion with most other professions, I would expect President Warren will have a plan for that.
To the extent doctors really retire and move to the Bahamas rather than work under M4A, there are thousands of very well qualified doctors and nurses across the world, unsaddled by the American doctors student debt, which will be happy to move to the USA and work in rural Kansas or Baltimore inner city for M4A in exchange for a green card.
The only thing I really don’t believe in, is doctors picking up their toys and moving en masse to Galt’s Gulch.
Only real difference is that it is US vs. local autocratic leader.
I know trifles like International Law count for little in the current administration, but local autocratic leader is the internationally acknowledged Head of State of sovereign country
The question, again, is under what authority would a US company pump the oil and sell it? The Republic of Syria is the acknowledged sovereign there, and the only one who can grant the legal authority. it's been a while since looting was considered a legal activity under the Law of War
It is one thing for ISIS to illegally pump, smuggle, and sell oil in the black market. A different think is for the USA Army to do the same thing. I doubt ExxonMobil would want to do that, or any company that ever expects to pump one barrel outside the USA
That would be the only legitimate reason. Inquisitive minds, though, wonder why we are doing it now, and not when ISIS was pumping and selling oil (mostly, or all of it, in Turkey)
It is not as if the President hasn't criticized the USA not "protecting" the Iraqi oil fields after the invasion, during the occupation, and afterwards trough the present day.
I guess we will be seeing the Army Corps of Oil Exploration and Production any day soon.
Either that, or Trump Yuuuuge Middle East Oil Ventures
As a very serious reply to your comment, I cannot recommend strongly enough Lebanese -French journalist Amin Malouf's "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" ( https://www.amazon.com/Crusades-Through-Arab-Eyes-Essentials/dp/0805208984 ), a full recap of the Crusades using only contemporary Arab sources.
Maalouf does point out the role Mongols had in the Crusades' origin, and his recap of the sack of Baghdad is quite moving
The part that I really don’t understand is this “there’s oil, and we have to protect the oil fields” thing.
To the extent there is oil, it belongs to the Syrian people, or to the Syrian government, (or to Assad personally, like in Saudi Arabia, I really don’t care).
To the extent that we are protecting that oil, protecting means making sure no one pumps it from the ground (like ISIS did in Iraq for a while). Is the President bringing tanks to make sure no one pumps oil there?
Or is he under the impression that the USA can/will pump out the oil?
And to do what with the oil? Sell it and give the money to its legitimate owner, even if that is Bashir al Assad? Or just use it to cover the running expenses of “killing al Bagdadi and protecting the oil”?
And who would pump the oil? The Army Corps of Oil Exploration and Production? Because no American oil major would touch that oil with a ten foot pole without authorization from its legitimate owner, who, for sure, is not the US Department of Defense.
Since the Mughal Empire and the Portuguese explorers were never present in the Middle East as the same time, and since very little to none of the current M.E. ventures can be traced, directly or indirectly, to early XVI century India, I fail to see the connection.
Where you to say that nothing that’s happening now in the M.E. would be happening if the Ottoman Empire had not lost the battle of Lepanto and started its decline into becoming the Sick Man of Europe, well, that would have made sense.
You are making my point. We have never had, in this country, contra George, the quaint notion of the people electing their leaders. Before the 17th Amendment, the people were only allowed to elect the Lower House. The states elected the President and Senate, and the President, with or without 5he advice and consent of the Senate, elected the rest of the Executive and the Federal Courts. Little to do with the quaint notion of the people electing their leaders.
I do note for the record that there’s an ongoing campaign to repel the 17th Amendment, and that close to 100% of those so campaigning align with the GOP, a party that has had, at least since the sixties, a deep aversion to the idea of the people electing their leaders.
I would think the best way to make sure Warren doesn't win the General is for her to not win the nomination, hence the Mayor Pete alternative.
If Warren is indeed nominated, as a Wall Street Tycoon, I would be very concerned that Trump is all that stands between President Warren and my offshore wealth
Wall Street is terrified of Warren. Seriously, even Dem-leaning money people don’t want the wealth tax, and will do just about anything to stop it.
If they don't want Warren (or Bernie), I suggest they jump onto Mayor Pete's wagon, the standard bearer of conservative, moderate, Democrats (an Afghanistan veteran, McKinsey alumni, you don't get more conservative Democrat than that). He has a better chance to stop Warren that Tulsi will ever have
Does the state not inspect transmission routes to make sure the utility is meeting it’s obligation?
California is very big, the T&D lines spans tens of thousands of miles, and voters, even in CA, want lower taxes, which do not include money for detailed inspections of T&D's right-of-ways.
The system assumes PG&E self policies these issues, subject to random spot checks, reporting from customers, and fines and liability payments when the negligence in maintaining required vegetation clearances results in damages to the environment or to third parties. Only 8.4 billion in damages, if PG&E gets lucky
No judge ordered PG&E to start the blackouts. PG&E did it out of "abundance of caution", and i won't be surprised if lawsuits follow, arguing that, had PG&E trimmed the vegetation, the fire risk would have minimal, and therefore the blackouts themselves are gross negligence
You are right that, if the concession to be the regulated local public utility is yanked away from PG&E, the standard procedure of for a new concession holder to buy from PG&E the T&D assets, at their depreciated replacement value (the regulated asset base). In many countries the T&D concession is not permanent, but subject to open season bids every so often (20 years is a normal), and the concession holder might be replaced in this process, being forced also to sell their assets to their replacement.
However, he thermal and nuclear generation assets are normally non regulated, and not subject to public utility concession and PG&E will likely keep those. The hydro generating plans normally are , too, subject to a concession that can be terminated by the regulator (they are using rivers that belong to the polity), but water laws might be different in CA, and you might "own" the running water, and not just the riparian land, as private property
I had posted a long response, including a link, and I think the link ate the response.
Can the author release it?
Short version, first part: I spent the last two weeks in Livermore, which is one of the affected communities. (my hotel wasn't affected) The areas hit are mostly quite wealthy communities: Sausalito, Marin, Sonoma, San Jose, Palo Alto, Livermore, Sacramento, Walnut Creek. All close to San Francisco or Sacramento. Less wealthy areas, further away from San Francisco, like Tracy (two hour plus commute in/out, have been spared.
Short version part two: Geography considerations dictate the areas affected, that is: which transmission lines are actually over overgrown trees or bushes, and are a fire hazard if the high winds topple the lines Cal Fire's forensic analysis of the 2017 fires show that PG&E's failure to trim vegetation in the right of ways AS MANDATED BY ENVIRONMENTAL AND TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION regulations is the direct cause, or a contributing factor, in several of the 2017 fires, and the reason why PG&E is liable for those damages, and hence in bankruptcy. Vegetation was not trimmed not because CA is a tree hugging lunacy hell, but because PG&E decided to not fulfill with CA regulations, because......????, even though the tariff it collects includes money allocated for vegetation trimming, money PG&E instead used to.....?????? I don't know, perhaps share buybacks
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Sunday Morning! The City & The City”
The TV series is in Amazon Prime. I just watched the first episode, and really liked it. At least in the series I think Borlu is reasonably fleshed up.
In any case, the series seems quite good. I look forward to seeing the remaining episodes.
On “Thursday Throughput: Nuclear Explosion Edition”
With newer technology used today, 40% is in the very low end of onshore wind being built today, though 30-40 % is right (for now) for solar.
Offshore wind produces way above 50%, and it’s significantly more reliable. Regretfully, in practice, the Jones Act makes it impossible to build offshore wind in the USA. Just one more thing the Jones Act is fishing us with.
(If Tulsi had wanted a cause that could propel her in the nomination, she should have seized the Jones Act. Hawai’i is the state most fished up by the Jones Act, even more than Puerto Rico (though PR doesn’t have EVs so it doesn’t count for fish). The Texas Gulf Coast oil industry is up there too (hey Senator Rafael Eduardo, do something for your state for a change, instead of looking for things your state can do for you))
"
As long as all the externalities are priced in.
In real life (like, having worked in power generation for close to 30 years), I can’t make an economic case for nuclear power that adds all the costs associated with it. Most of which no one even mentions:
Like...
- Disposal of fuel residues
- Decommissioning and cleanup of the site (what, did you think the plant will be there one hundred years from now?)
- Insurance. Nuclear power in not insurable in the commercial reinsurance markets
- Financing and cost overruns protections (I.e. no matter the final costs, the tariff will be adjusted to make the plant profitable enough to service debt) or loan guarantees.
- Accident clean up costs.
Plus, the large size of nuclear power plants (to squeeze the last possible economy of scale possible), and their must-run characteristics (not only they can’t cycle up and down following the load, they can’t easily be turned off and on either) create further operational issues
- The grid has to carry large generation reserves (for those days when nuclear is off for maintenance) which are rarely used, but have to be paid off by customers too (he, another externality).
- Lastly, for now, nuclear requires large (and expensive) transmission systems to distribute all that energy. More distributed generation would be far easier to manage, more reliable, and much cheaper to move around.
I would agree that many of these issues could be avoided if somehow there were commercial small nuclear plants, similar to those in nuclear powered vessels. I do not know what are the technical and economic reasons why no one in the world has, to my knowledge, built one such small (let’s say 50 MW) nuclear plant. But, 1GW nuclear plants only make economic sense to investors if the public bears almost all the risks. Not even Apple, Shell, or Aramco, could survive Fukushima.
"
Im only familiar with California, but renewable generators do not get a state subsidy in CA. What you have is a mandate that utilities buy X% of renewable energy.
Which obviously, is a big thing, but it’s not a cash subsidy.
On “Vinyl On Pace to Outsell CDs: Here’s What That Means”
A friend of mine collects and restores old electronics (1940s to early 60s).
And he has boatloads of 8 tracks and 45s to play in his toys.
He actually hooks his Alexa to the Aux input of these players. The audio quality is extraordinary
"
At the risk of derailing the discussion...
Last Christmas, the 22 y.o. son of friends I was staying with decided that a turntable would be “the” gift for his girlfriend.
His father and I watched him assemble the thing (it came out in pieces, apparently you can’t ship an assembled turntable via Amazon and have it survive the trip), and then the dad grudgingly agreed to find out some old L.Ps from the attic.
Hilarity ensued when we all realized the son, born in the late 90s, hadn’t actually touched an L.P. In his life, much less played one. It took a couple of hours to walk him on how to handle the LP (from the edge), how to raise and drop the needle (with the little lever, and not your hand), that the dark bands in the vinyl separate the different songs, that no, you can’t (*) seek a particular track with a fast forward button, that unless you are a trained DJ you don’t touch the LP when it’s turning, that the lyrics are printed in the box.
Equally funny was watching the boy repeat the lesson to his girlfriend on Christmas Day (with his dad correcting him when he had something wrong.
And for us it was a bit shocking that something that was as common air when we were growing up had completely disappeared to the point our adult children had never been exposed to it.
(*) yes, I know certain fancy 80s turntables had detectors that could recognize the track dividers (most of the time). I had one of those. The guy in the history’s turntable didn’t have that feature.
On “Elizabeth Warren Releases Medicare For All Plan, Math Debate Ensues”
I’m not saying the good doctor (whose posts I miss terribly) is bluffing.
I’m saying he’s probably venting in frustration because he can’t have done the math, because no practitioner can do the math yet.
The good doctor can calculate how much the practice’s revenue will go down, because he knows how many patients he treats, and how much M4A will pay.
But he doesn’t know how much his operating costs will go down by reducing the costs of managing billing to insurance companies. These costs are far from trivial. He doesn’t know what will be the billing costs for his practice under M4A
So the good doctor can’t know yet if his practice will, at the end of the day, be less or more profitable, and by how much.
Medical billing specialists are doomed under M4A. But they are doomed under any change of the current system, be it the UK system, the German system, the French system.
But doctors might even come ahead. Right know, neither we nor them know.
"
You are right, the AMA’s supply restrictions are a non trivial part of the health care cost problem, by rationing the licensing of practitioners. But, like with engineers (example: me), there’s nothing inherently wrong on how doctors are trained in many parts of the world, from Canada, to Mexico, to Japan, to China, to Israel, to Western Europe.
So I don’t find anything inherently wrong with allowing foreign doctors to go through a licensing process even if they trained in a foreign university.
"
I’ve heard you say this several times, and my follow up question (to you and Dr. Saunders) is
“Shutter the clinics and do what? Learn to code?”
I am asking this in all earnest. Are doctors so rich that they will just retire and live from their wealth (better use it before Elizabeth Warren takes it away).
In real life, doctors, and the doctors market, will accommodate the change.
Others have already pointed out that clinic’s costs will go down because the insurance billing and insurance compliance functions will be reduced to a small fraction of what they are, so both revenues and costs will fall (who will fall the most is unclear right now).
Doctors might make less money than now, but most professionals, and almost all non college educated people make less than doctors do, and still can raise their families. To the extent that the new structure makes it impossible for doctors to service their own student loans, which are massive, and out of proportion with most other professions, I would expect President Warren will have a plan for that.
To the extent doctors really retire and move to the Bahamas rather than work under M4A, there are thousands of very well qualified doctors and nurses across the world, unsaddled by the American doctors student debt, which will be happy to move to the USA and work in rural Kansas or Baltimore inner city for M4A in exchange for a green card.
The only thing I really don’t believe in, is doctors picking up their toys and moving en masse to Galt’s Gulch.
On “ISIS Leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi Killed, President Trump Announces”
Only real difference is that it is US vs. local autocratic leader.
I know trifles like International Law count for little in the current administration, but local autocratic leader is the internationally acknowledged Head of State of sovereign country
The question, again, is under what authority would a US company pump the oil and sell it? The Republic of Syria is the acknowledged sovereign there, and the only one who can grant the legal authority. it's been a while since looting was considered a legal activity under the Law of War
It is one thing for ISIS to illegally pump, smuggle, and sell oil in the black market. A different think is for the USA Army to do the same thing. I doubt ExxonMobil would want to do that, or any company that ever expects to pump one barrel outside the USA
"
By the way, you can get a basic understanding of the (origin of) the Kurd problem in Maalouf's book
Yes, the Crusades are a contributing factor to the contemporary Kurd issue. The past is always with us
"
That would be the only legitimate reason. Inquisitive minds, though, wonder why we are doing it now, and not when ISIS was pumping and selling oil (mostly, or all of it, in Turkey)
It is not as if the President hasn't criticized the USA not "protecting" the Iraqi oil fields after the invasion, during the occupation, and afterwards trough the present day.
I guess we will be seeing the Army Corps of Oil Exploration and Production any day soon.
Either that, or Trump Yuuuuge Middle East Oil Ventures
(or are both the same)?
"
As a very serious reply to your comment, I cannot recommend strongly enough Lebanese -French journalist Amin Malouf's "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" ( https://www.amazon.com/Crusades-Through-Arab-Eyes-Essentials/dp/0805208984 ), a full recap of the Crusades using only contemporary Arab sources.
Maalouf does point out the role Mongols had in the Crusades' origin, and his recap of the sack of Baghdad is quite moving
"
Well, me, I am actually for Democracy, and i would like to finally implement the quaint idea of the people electing their leaders.
"
The part that I really don’t understand is this “there’s oil, and we have to protect the oil fields” thing.
To the extent there is oil, it belongs to the Syrian people, or to the Syrian government, (or to Assad personally, like in Saudi Arabia, I really don’t care).
To the extent that we are protecting that oil, protecting means making sure no one pumps it from the ground (like ISIS did in Iraq for a while). Is the President bringing tanks to make sure no one pumps oil there?
Or is he under the impression that the USA can/will pump out the oil?
And to do what with the oil? Sell it and give the money to its legitimate owner, even if that is Bashir al Assad? Or just use it to cover the running expenses of “killing al Bagdadi and protecting the oil”?
And who would pump the oil? The Army Corps of Oil Exploration and Production? Because no American oil major would touch that oil with a ten foot pole without authorization from its legitimate owner, who, for sure, is not the US Department of Defense.
"
Since the Mughal Empire and the Portuguese explorers were never present in the Middle East as the same time, and since very little to none of the current M.E. ventures can be traced, directly or indirectly, to early XVI century India, I fail to see the connection.
Where you to say that nothing that’s happening now in the M.E. would be happening if the Ottoman Empire had not lost the battle of Lepanto and started its decline into becoming the Sick Man of Europe, well, that would have made sense.
"
You are making my point. We have never had, in this country, contra George, the quaint notion of the people electing their leaders. Before the 17th Amendment, the people were only allowed to elect the Lower House. The states elected the President and Senate, and the President, with or without 5he advice and consent of the Senate, elected the rest of the Executive and the Federal Courts. Little to do with the quaint notion of the people electing their leaders.
I do note for the record that there’s an ongoing campaign to repel the 17th Amendment, and that close to 100% of those so campaigning align with the GOP, a party that has had, at least since the sixties, a deep aversion to the idea of the people electing their leaders.
On “Tulsi Gabbard Taps Out on Congress”
I would think the best way to make sure Warren doesn't win the General is for her to not win the nomination, hence the Mayor Pete alternative.
If Warren is indeed nominated, as a Wall Street Tycoon, I would be very concerned that Trump is all that stands between President Warren and my offshore wealth
"
Wall Street is terrified of Warren. Seriously, even Dem-leaning money people don’t want the wealth tax, and will do just about anything to stop it.
If they don't want Warren (or Bernie), I suggest they jump onto Mayor Pete's wagon, the standard bearer of conservative, moderate, Democrats (an Afghanistan veteran, McKinsey alumni, you don't get more conservative Democrat than that). He has a better chance to stop Warren that Tulsi will ever have
On “Rosebud”
The Guardian just published an excellent article on how PG&E’s incentives are misaligned with those of customers. Here it is
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/11/california-power-shutoffs-when-your-public-utility-is-owned-by-private-investors
I strongly recommend it if you want to get a better understanding of the issue
On “Two Rudy Giuliani Associates Arrested”
Damn we Rich & Important People have too many contracts to review and cannot properly waste time making smartalecky comments on the internet.
When you are free of the Feds, you can get the unused portion of your refundable tickets, you know, refunded
On “Rosebud”
Does the state not inspect transmission routes to make sure the utility is meeting it’s obligation?
California is very big, the T&D lines spans tens of thousands of miles, and voters, even in CA, want lower taxes, which do not include money for detailed inspections of T&D's right-of-ways.
The system assumes PG&E self policies these issues, subject to random spot checks, reporting from customers, and fines and liability payments when the negligence in maintaining required vegetation clearances results in damages to the environment or to third parties. Only 8.4 billion in damages, if PG&E gets lucky
"
No judge ordered PG&E to start the blackouts. PG&E did it out of "abundance of caution", and i won't be surprised if lawsuits follow, arguing that, had PG&E trimmed the vegetation, the fire risk would have minimal, and therefore the blackouts themselves are gross negligence
"
You are right that, if the concession to be the regulated local public utility is yanked away from PG&E, the standard procedure of for a new concession holder to buy from PG&E the T&D assets, at their depreciated replacement value (the regulated asset base). In many countries the T&D concession is not permanent, but subject to open season bids every so often (20 years is a normal), and the concession holder might be replaced in this process, being forced also to sell their assets to their replacement.
However, he thermal and nuclear generation assets are normally non regulated, and not subject to public utility concession and PG&E will likely keep those. The hydro generating plans normally are , too, subject to a concession that can be terminated by the regulator (they are using rivers that belong to the polity), but water laws might be different in CA, and you might "own" the running water, and not just the riparian land, as private property
"
I had posted a long response, including a link, and I think the link ate the response.
Can the author release it?
Short version, first part: I spent the last two weeks in Livermore, which is one of the affected communities. (my hotel wasn't affected) The areas hit are mostly quite wealthy communities: Sausalito, Marin, Sonoma, San Jose, Palo Alto, Livermore, Sacramento, Walnut Creek. All close to San Francisco or Sacramento. Less wealthy areas, further away from San Francisco, like Tracy (two hour plus commute in/out, have been spared.
Short version part two: Geography considerations dictate the areas affected, that is: which transmission lines are actually over overgrown trees or bushes, and are a fire hazard if the high winds topple the lines Cal Fire's forensic analysis of the 2017 fires show that PG&E's failure to trim vegetation in the right of ways AS MANDATED BY ENVIRONMENTAL AND TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION regulations is the direct cause, or a contributing factor, in several of the 2017 fires, and the reason why PG&E is liable for those damages, and hence in bankruptcy. Vegetation was not trimmed not because CA is a tree hugging lunacy hell, but because PG&E decided to not fulfill with CA regulations, because......????, even though the tariff it collects includes money allocated for vegetation trimming, money PG&E instead used to.....?????? I don't know, perhaps share buybacks
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.