Not going to get into the laptop discussion but the wildfires are 100% due to heat and drought, and those are much worse recently because of global warning. PG&E could bury ever cable, they could increase the fire prevention budget by 10 times over, and it wouldn't fix it.
You're saying that the wildfires are 100% caused by heat and drought? I think you should have a look at the huge heap of evidence pointing to poor forest management being the true culprit. It's a fact of nature that forests WILL burn and the more humans interfere with nature, the more unintended consequences we'll cause. There are plenty of natural ignition sources and forests are equipped to deal with relatively low intensity fires. Here's just one example: https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/02/25/wildfire...
No, nothing is ever "100% caused by" any one thing, but it seems dishonest to act like there's no discernible link between record wildfires and record heat and drought.
It's equally dishonest to discount the positive mitigation of a reasonable fire prevention budget and burying/maintaining infrastructure. Especially when the presence of Fraud is taken into account.
The Climate may be famously closed to negotiation, but it doesn't mean human artifice need exacerbate the problem through avoiding doing necessary work.
I suppose if you could convert California into a rain forest, maybe they wouldn't have forest fires. Then they could run the power lines any which way, and everyone would be happy. Right?
You ask how to convert it into a rain forest? How about heating the ocean offshore, so more water evaporates?
Well duh, but since we're talking about climate change we should be comparing against a counterfactual where climate change hasn't happened. I'm sure heat/drought existed prior to global warming. Did wild fires not exist back then? Should Newsom be let off the hook for his budget cuts because the forest was going to catch fire anyways due to global warming?
