Monday, November 4, 2019

FOCUS: 'Not Our Mission': Private Fire Crews Protect the Insured, Not the Public








Reader Supported News
03 November 19
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

Firefighters work to defend homes from an approaching wildfire in Sonoma, California. (photograph: Jim Urquhart/Reuters)
Susie Cagle and Vivian Ho, Guardian UK
Excerpt: "The engines, big and small, came from all over the country to fight the Kincade fire in the Sonoma county wine region of California. There were trucks from Nevada, South Dakota, Colorado - and from the wildfire protection unit of home insurer AIG."

EXCERPT:
“Our task with the insurance industry is more so to prepare the homes and secure them, prior to and after the fire, and contribute to the survivability,” he said.
“Our [wildfire protection unit] teams are not private firefighters,” said Matt Gallagher, a spokesman for AIG – yet they station engines with full tanks in evacuation zones during wildfires that can turn dangerous within seconds.
Lawmakers grew concerned that civilians would see these private engines and get a false sense of security about remaining in evacuation zones. Government firefighters voiced complaints about rolling onto a scene, believing the area to be fully evacuated, only to find private fire crews who had not alerted incident command.
In the 2018 Woolsey fire, Kim Kardashian famously hired private firefighters to save her $50m Calabasas mansion – a crew that, said Wills, never told anyone of their plans. “That’s just incredibly dangerous,” Wills said.

Prior to the 2018 fire season, California lawmakers passed a bill requiring private crews to alert public incident command and obtain permission before entering an evacuation zone. The law codified a best-practice guideline put in place in 2008. Torgerson, who founded his company that same year, said his company has always followed these directives, and will continue to do so now that the law is in effect.





"...The federal government owns 45.8 percent of California’s land, while 4 percent is owned by the state and 51 percent is privately owned. CAL FIRE manages both state and private land. Part of the reason it is so difficult to manage California forests is the bureaucratic milieu. The Forest Service manages 193 million acres of land, has 28,000 employees, and has an annual outlay of $7 billion a year, according to a 2017 Analytical Perspective from the budget of the U.S. government.

For decades, environmental protection schemes have usurped common sense. For example, most fire ecologists say that the surest way of preventing massive forest fires is to use prescribed burns. The California Environmental Protection Agency states that “prescribed burning is the intentional use of fire to reduce wildfire hazards, clear downed trees, control plant diseases, improve rangeland and wildlife habitats, and restore natural ecosystems.”..."

"...Despite scientific evidence, the federal government continues spending more money on fire suppression than prescribed burns. The Forest Service has performed prescribed burns on an average of 2,187,64 2 acres a year for the past ten years, according to the National Interagency Fire Center.

This means the Forest Service has only performed prescribed burns on 11.3 percent of the land they manage. When explaining to Mother Jones why the California Wine Country fires were so bad last October, fire ecologist Sasha Berleman said, “We have 100 years of fire suppression that has led to this huge accumulation of fuel loads.”

The policy of fire suppression has created what insurance companies call “mega catastrophes,” a term that describes disasters that result in insured losses of more than $1 billion. Mega catastrophes are becoming the norm in California. In 2017, there were 5,906 fires on state and private land, Kathleen Schori, an assistant chief at CAL FIRE, said in a phone interview. “Extreme fire behavior has become more commonplace,” says the Forest Service...."

LINK




This is not a new article, but highlights historical safety neglect by PG&E.

"Pacific Gas and Electric Co. diverted more than $100 million in gas safety and operations money collected from customers over a 15-year period and spent it for other purposes, including profit for stockholders and bonuses for executives
, according to a pair of state-ordered reports released Thursday.

An independent audit and a staff report issued by the California Public Utilities Commission depicted a poorly led company well-heeled in its gas operations and more concerned with profit than safety.

The documents link a deficient PG&E safety culture - with its "focus on financial performance" - to the pipeline explosion in San Bruno on Sept. 9, 2010, that killed eight people and destroyed 38 homes.

The "low priority" the company gave to pipeline safety during the three years leading up to the San Bruno blast was "well outside industry practice - even during times of corporate austerity programs," said the audit by Overland Consulting of Leawood, Kan."
LINK

No comments:

Post a Comment