While it gets a bit opinionated at the end, there was an interesting article posted about "technical debt" that so much of the infrastructure in the US is afflicted with.
RX Reven' said:I'm with aircooled…I’ve lived my whole life in California…this is my home…I’m not going to cut and run, I’m going to attack the bad guys and fight to fix MY HOME.
I wish you luck (no snark)! What's the plan for attacking the bad guys and fixing your home? You're a statistician, what do you think your odds of success might be, and how far reaching or long lasting might that success be? Now contrast those odds and the amount of work required vs simply moving. Do whatever enables you to achieve the best life you can. If that's in CA, then fine. If it's not, that's fine too.
I completely get not wanting to leave. But that just means you haven't reached a point yet where you've had enough. The benefits of living there still outweigh the drawbacks for you. That limit is different for everybody.
I think there are different levels of "fed up" in any scenario. It could be frustration with a significant other, a project car, the building you live in, or the state/country you call home. The lowest level of "fed up" could be called "grumbling on the internet", followed by the escalated "taking action to attempt change", and the highest level is basically "leaving the problem behind".
We all deal with project cars that can be a pain in the ass, and sometimes we keep plugging away until the car is what we want it to be, and other times we realize it might be smarter and less exhausting to just cut bait and move on to something that's a better platform from the start for what we want to do. Everybody and every situation is different. Take the option that enables you to live how you want to live, just understand that there are always options.
In reply to Ian F :
To a certain extent that jives with what I've been saying in this thread. Either by lack of company will, or by lack of regulation, PG&E hasn't put the money into infrastructure improvements it needed to long ago.
Even if sudden California had a publicly owned electric utility, we can garuntee the same wouldn't have happened. "Hey everyone we're gonna raise your rates because our system is old and needs upgrading." The masses would just say "California being California!"
One of the primary issues in CA (and I am sure other states) is not really the taxes, it's HOW they are used (or not used). Most would not have an issue paying the taxes (or paying more in some cases) if we where in ANY way confident it would be used to improve things.
Just to give you a similar example: There was a recent very large tax increase on gas. The stated purpose was to improve the roads / freeways. There have been TWO other taxes/bonds for that purpose, neither of which ended up being used for the stated purpose. Well.... you might guess this one... the many, many, many millions being generated by the tax now (there was an attempt to kill it)... 18% of the tax is being use for repairs, and a union reps reports that they are LAYING OFF road repair employees!
I should also note, I am currently just outside of a mandatory evacuation area for a fire going on now (smoke, but not too bad yet). You know what the most disruptive thing that could happen right now? Yep, cutting the power. The local news is giving very good information for tracking the location and progress of the fire.
How to change it (here and other places)? There is a pain point that HAS to be reached at some point. Of course, if those who give leave, and those who take stay, or come, that may also reach a tipping point. Sadly, a fully illogical response to a national situation has resulted in voting in state representative elections effectively removing the ability to challenge many of these things...
I think the big problem will be when 1000s of Joe average people go out and buy Harbor Freight generators and bring 10-20 gallons of fuel to keep them working.....
I lost a couple cars when wires sparked together and sparked a fire in my friends back yard in El Monte years ago.
this was on the flatlands and not in the canyons but it was heavy winds that day ,
I'd say the issue partly is is that these new taxes are put in to effect, raise millions of dollars, but the government (local, state, fed) know berkeley all what they're doing when it comes to properly spending it. It's not like they'll actually have to answer to anyone as to why they're not spending the money properly, overspending, going with a E36 M3 company, not understanding how to manage or coordinate a project, etc etc.
Voters will vote how they normally do and people will continue to be in positions they have no business in being in.
The only thing that will change is higher taxes and more taxes.
pheller said:In reply to Ian F :
To a certain extent that jives with what I've been saying in this thread. Either by lack of company will, or by lack of regulation, PG&E hasn't put the money into infrastructure improvements it needed to long ago.
Even if sudden California had a publicly owned electric utility, we can garuntee the same wouldn't have happened. "Hey everyone we're gonna raise your rates because our system is old and needs upgrading." The masses would just say "California being California!"
My parents have this with OPPD in Nebraska. No BS, full transparency- people grumble when rates go up (right now they'd like to get more solar since we filled it with progressives), but otherwise our utilities cost typically 66% of everyone else's.
I doubt it's the answer to California's problem, but OPPD has really shown me that a state-run entity can work seriously well- possibly a good framework to base off of.
In reply to pheller :
Part of the problem is these sorts of infrastructure upgrade projects take time. Some might recall the Northeast Blackout of 2003. A result of that "oops" was many local utility companies actually did start to upgrade their systems. PSE&G in NJ was one of them. My company did work for them with regards to those upgrades. However, it took nearly a decade before actual shovels went into the ground and new equipment stated getting installed. Some of the work is still going on today.
NJ is the 47th largest state in the US. California is the 3rd largest. Upgrading the electrical infrastructure in California will take decades, no matter how much money you throw at the problem.
The general public often doesn't want to understand how long massive projects like this take to even get started, much less get finished. And in reality, they are never finished - which is sort of the point.
Realistically, for the fire danger issue, you certainly don’t need to rewire the whole state, I am sure there are some fairly identifiable area to concentrate on first. These winds tend to follow certain corridors.
I am sure it will take time, which even more highlights the absurdity of ignoring it for so long.
Oh, and one more point in regards to killing the power. Not only does it make info much harder to get, it make evacuation a lot harder since the traffic lights are all out!
In reply to STM317 :
thanks for the well thought out reply...I’m in Costa Rica right now and I’m about to board a plane to get back to Los Angeles...it’s going to be a challenge getting home tonight as all of the major routes either have been closed or are closed or are at risk of being closed. Take care for now.
And another tangentially related thing: small airports have been closing around the country. In cases like this, you REALLY want an airport close to you. The fire near me is about a 5 min from a good sized regional airport and a Navy air base and they are bombing the crap out of it.
In reply to RX Reven' :
I have a lot of respect for this reply.. We get the goverment and leadership we get through our actions and invovlement in the process.... don't like it. get involved.
jr02518 said:Fun fact, Sacramento in built in the delta plain, the levies that surround the city keep the water at bay. They do not have water meters. In the middle of the central valley the homes have green grass year round. They have more water than they know what to do with.
This is not true, there are water meters in Sacramento. Forced on us by the people in Los Angeles and San Diego that we supply with water. California has about doubled in population since it built any water storage. Residential use is about 10% of total, and that is where they are focusing conservation and punishment for failing to conserve.
STM317 said:All I'm going to say is that we all make a choice every day to live where we do. Humans have been uprooting their lives and moving to greener pastures for as long as there have been humans. Live in a place where you can live your best life. If you decide that's CA, with it's climate (both natural and political), then you just accept the drawbacks as the cost of doing business, and hopefully do your best to mitigate.
People are fleeing California rapidly. You can rent a U-haul truck going from Houston to Sacramento for less than a grand. To rent a truck from Sacramento to Houston is about three grand. DO NOT EVER RENT FROM U-HAUL, NEVER! I used this example to illustrate the balance of emigration versus immigration.
It used to be that there had to be 10' of clear space on either side of a utility easement. Environmentalists got this changed to 4' We used to have a logging industry here that would tend to the forests, that is gone. We used to clear brush using controlled burns, no more. There is a lot more fuel for fires, and fires are more likely due to this.
Upgrading infrastructure does take a long time. Especially if you give all the money to do it to your upper management, rather than doing basic maintenance on your equipment.
There are a lot of reasons why this state is so screwed up. Primary reason can't be discussed in this venue.
RX Reven' said:Highly annoyed lifelong California resident here…
Google search “gallons of water required to grow one almond”…
California supplies about 80% of the United States almonds and dedicates 10%, or 80 million gallons of its state's water to grow the nut. To grow one almond requires 1.1 gallons of water and to grow a pound takes 1,900 gallons.
I Just checked Costco’s current price on almonds…um, a 48 ounce bag (three pounds so 5,700 gallons of water) sells for $21.97. So, in the world of almonds, water generates $3.85 all-up sales per 1,000 gallons.
My lawn looks like E36 M3 due to mandatory rationing…15 extra gallons per day would have it looking great…that’s $21.10 per year in Almond/Water all-up sales value.
My options…
- Accept having a E36 M3’y looking lawn
- Break the law and risk fines + certain public ridicule
- Spend 10K+ to rip everything out and put in a lameass fake lawn or some drought resistant stuff.
Just charge me the all-up net sales value almond price of $21.10 per year to have a nice lawn.
It’s a joke to pretend that a gallon of water spent on almonds is somehow fundamentally different than a gallon spent on making my lawn look nice. I mean what are we saying…a person that decides to eat almonds even though they consume a huge amount of water and there’s a nearly infinite number of lower water consumption alternatives available is somehow morally superior, takes priority, is more important than someone that would prefer to have a nice lawn.
See also low flow toilets that clog up far more often (somehow, I’m supposed to pay a plumber 100’s of dollars to un-clog my toilet so water can be diverted to people that can buy three pounds of almonds = 5,700 gallons of water at Costco for $21.97).
FWIW, I’m in Costa Rica right now on business…I got a Book of Faces alert from a High School friend of mine this morning…he’s in the 90+ percent income range and has given up on California…moving to Arizona…had enough with being taxed to death and being told he’s a piece of E36 M3 for not giving more; Goodbye.
Plant some almond trees in your yard?
If you have landscaping now, you can recoup some of what it costs to switch to xeriscape, I believe there are incentives to do so. You can also get free trees delivered from the local utility company, or can around here. Trees really don't take that much water, unless you are growing produce, then they sort of can. I have a soaker hose I lay around trees at the drip line. Water them maybe once a week, unless it is really hot, which it is, often. Grapefruit, orange, meyer lemon, tangerine and a couple of peach trees. Lawn kind of went to crap when they were telling everyone to quit watering their yard a few summers ago, but those trees get water no matter what.
LA County is pretty much surrounded by desert, so there is that.
A proper discussion of water in California would certainly violate the terms of use for this site.
Have any of y'all talking about water issues in CA read Cadillac Desert? It does a really good job of explaining water rights in the West. They are very different than other parts of the country.
The comment about green lawns in the central valley and more water than they know what to do with is flat wrong. They got the same water rationing laws applied as everyone else during the recent drought. No washing your car in the street, can only water your lawn during certain times on certain days, etc. You had to either wash your car in your yard (so runoff soaks back in, and eventually gets back to the aquifers) or go to a car wash. Source: I lived there for 5 years and worked with water districts.
RealMiniNoMore said:Plant some almond trees in your yard?
I know this is in jest, but it does point out some of the absurdity. Let's say you have a yard big enough to plant 20 trees in. As noted, water hungry. You will pay through the NOSE for the water, because you are residential, and metered (the more you use, the more the rates go up). If you are zoned agricultural, you pay zero (need strong confirmation on this, but I am pretty sure) for the water (though they do have some sort of conservation stuff in effect).
thatsnowinnebago said:
...The comment about green lawns in the central valley and more water than they know what to do with is flat wrong. They got the same water rationing laws applied as everyone else during the recent drought. No washing your car in the street, can only water your lawn during certain times on certain days, etc. You had to either wash your car in your yard (so runoff soaks back in, and eventually gets back to the aquifers) or go to a car wash. Source: I lived there for 5 years and worked with water districts.
Sort of. That's residential, same restrictions. But if you are zoned for agricultural... as many almost trees as you like is fine.
And as noted about metering around Sacramento, I have a friend who lives in Lodi (insert CCR reference) which is just outside Sac, and they installed meters there maybe 10 years ago?
Just came here to make another note about the "situation":
Another one to add to the list, the rather large Easy fire (which was very close to me) was also caused by a power pole! That makes the three largest fires this year all caused by power poles (I would guess others were also), and that is with the power cutoffs. What are they going to do next year, just cut off the entire state for a week or two?!
I am starting to suspect, contrary to my previous guess, that historically (at least in recent years), MOST of the fires in CA are started by power poles, they just did not aggressively report them previously. Perhaps some PR maneuverings from the power company helped that out...
As a point of trivia: The fire started near Easy street (thus the name) which is the home of a few hot rod shops (there are a number in the area) and I think the only automotive paint supply shop in the area.
Made a drive from Seattle to LA a couple weeks back and seeing all of the fires from the San Fran to LA area was insane and the amount of people and equipment involved in battling. In some of the more rural areas it looked like they were using firetrucks from the 60s to take on the blaze.
With that being said I bought a bunch of stocks in PG&E when it hit rock bottom and it's blowing my mind how much it's been rising even with their power outages and reported fires started by their poles.
You'll need to log in to post.
