3 ms·
"Great they are doing this" but passing the cost on to their customers, who will foot the bill for it. So maybe you should thank the PG&E customers who will end
by rexreed 5y ago
"Great they are doing this" but passing the cost on to their customers, who will foot the bill for it. So maybe you should thank the PG&E customers who will end up paying for it.
- indymike 5y ago> "Great they are doing this" but passing the cost on to their customers, who will foot the bill for it It's probably worth it to the customers, too. So much so that PG&E's survival is in question if they don't start taking fire safety super-seriously.
- lupire 5y agoMost PG&E customers don't live in fire zones, though.
- njarboe 5y agoI would say most of them do. Look at a satellite map of the Bay Area. Most cities are built right up against forested areas that I would call fire zones. The Santa Rosa fire and the Oakland hills fire were quite large and burned thousands of homes in urban areas, but started in forested areas nearby. Saying people should stop building in the forest and stay in cities will prevent the problems when the forests burn forget that most of the cities in California are next to forests that burn (Bay Area, Los Angeles, etc.). I guess we could clear cut those.
- randerson 5y agoMany live downwind of the smoke, though.
- baby 5y agoI’m not sure I get your point.
- pradn 5y agoThe customers use the electricity they generate. Who else would pay for it?
- 8note 5y agoOr charge the PG&E customers for the various forest fires their electrical consumption has caused
- dang 5y agoWe detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27918330 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27918330.