Despite what you may have heard, most of California’s deadly wildfires have been caused by arson or power companies.
Listen below:
Order my new book: “Follow the $cience: How Big Pharma Misleads, Obscures, and Prevails.”
Subscribe to my two podcasts: “The Sharyl Attkisson Podcast” and “Full Measure After Hours.” Leave a review, subscribe and share with your friends! Support independent journalism by visiting the Sharyl Attkisson store.
Visit SharylAttkisson.com, www.FullMeasure.news and Sharyl’s Substack for original reporting.
Do your own research. Make up your own mind. Think for yourself.
I was frustrated to see the piece on the fires in our state. While the discussion of the sources was of interest, the facts that are behind the infernos they caused was absent. Viewers should know that the utter lack of comprehensive management of the wold lands, as we had in the 70’s and even into the 80s, before the state became a communist state, have now routinely turned a seasonal fire into an inferno. “They” blame wind but we have had wind since the beginning of time. They blame climate change, but heat does not cause fires – a source of ignition coupled with fuel does. I have lived in this state all of my now 68 years and have NEVER seen such deliberate destruction. Oh and as a side note – PG & E lost the lawsuit regarding the Camp fire – but were subsequently ALLOWED TO CHARGE BACK THOSE COSTS TO RATEPAYERS! PG & E was also the company highlighted in Erin Brockovich. Both SCE and PG & E are frankly, murderers. Finally, I understand that now they plan to underground power lines in the Eaton Canyon area – and charge that back to rate payers as well. When will those two companies be held accountable? You need to do a follow up segment on these infernos.
WHO sets the spending priorities of UTILITIES (PG&E) in California? California policy caused PG&E to invest in renewables rather than infrastructure, but PG&E also decided to aim for 100% renewables by 2045, even exceeding goals. COMPLIANCE, grants and tax credit seeking may have encouraged significant infrastructure neglect along with state policy goals. Please consider resource allocation and government and corporate prioritization. The taxpayers will pay for all of this in the end, but maybe this will result in somebody reprioritizing forestry management (and other infrastructure)? California structure dictates function. Hope there is somebody else out there asking how priorities are set.