Insurance rates skyrocketing in California

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Sounds like a set up for some group rates from a single company. Or maybe the HellOwnersAssociation can self insure community wide.

 

[FelixDeCat]

- Just self insure at that point, $15K annual premium I'd rather put the money in a fund and go to church on Sunday.

Church is tomorrow bro, dont be late!

 

[Brainonska511]

The CA Insurance Commissioner who controls what prices the insurance companies can charge. They basically stopped approving any increases for most of 2020-2021 despite rapid increases in prices charged per sq-ft for rebuilding of homes. This resulted in home Insurance companies to not be able to charge appropriately for risk. You add in this PG&E whose equipment started multiple fires because of their lack of maintaining of equipment you had a recipe for failure and insurance companies deciding to walk away from the market.

You can build in high risk areas you just got to build the right way and create defensible space around the property. To long not doing this has been acceptable in CA. In addition at the State and Federal level the forest haven't been properly cleared of ground vegetation. So instead of paying hundreds of millions in forest management they wind up paying billions in firefighting costs.

Good video discussing this. California Wildfires 2018 - California's Unsustainable Legacy

Yes, you have to build and landscape right in higher risk areas. I'm just saying we could stop building into those higher risk areas in the first place by letting people build more in the population centers. It would help broaden tbe risk pool and reduce the proportion of high-risk properties.

 

[manly]

Yes, you have to build and landscape right in higher risk areas. I'm just saying we could stop building into those higher risk areas in the first place by letting people build more in the population centers. It would help broaden tbe risk pool and reduce the proportion of high-risk properties.

At least in California, those are two separate concerns. Many people really want to live near the wildland-urban interface, but the costs are being socialized every time there's a catastrophe. NIMBYism is indeed pushing people away from the expensive coasts, but mostly into inland suburbs. In general, California still needs more housing stock to address the unaffordability crisis.

People may recall that the aptly-named Paradise, CA was destroyed nearly 6 years ago by a wildfire. By and large, residents are going to rebuild their town instead of deciding that the fire risk is too high.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Poured concrete walls, steel studs/rafters and a metal roof. NO vegetation within 100'. It would look sterile, have little curb appeal and probably be hard to cool, but it wouldn't burn.

I suppose design and insulation would help though.

And a 200' burning redwood falls through the roof.

 

[BoomerD]

And a 200' burning redwood falls through the roof.

If you have 200' burning redwoods falling around your house...I think it really doesn't matter what kind of house you have...it's gonna be toast.

 

[Brovane]

At least in California, those are two separate concerns. Many people really want to live near the wildland-urban interface, but the costs are being socialized every time there's a catastrophe. NIMBYism is indeed pushing people away from the expensive coasts, but mostly into inland suburbs. In general, California still needs more housing stock to address the unaffordability crisis.

People may recall that the aptly-named Paradise, CA was destroyed nearly 6 years ago by a wildfire. By and large, residents are going to rebuild their town instead of deciding that the fire risk is too high.

If you remember that fire was started by poorly maintained equipment by PG&E.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

If you remember that fire was started by poorly maintained equipment by PG&E.

While true, the entire town was still destroyed by a single fire. That's all untenable situation because you cannot guarantee a fire will never break out, especially in those areas where wildfires are literally part of the cycle of nature.

There's a reason the natives didn't build in those forests.

 

[Brovane]

While true, the entire town was still destroyed by a single fire. That's all untenable situation because you cannot guarantee a fire will never break out, especially in those areas where wildfires are literally part of the cycle of nature.

There's a reason the natives didn't build in those forests.

That is part of the problem is that wildfires are literally a part of the cycle of natures and for decades the US forest service has done everything possible to break that cycle of fire in forests so when a fire does start it is incredibly intense because you decades of brush that built up. You have a combination of forests not properly maintained, you had high winds and then poorly maintained electrical equipment. All of those came together to create a untenable situation. You fix any one of those 3 items and the entire town probably wouldn't have been destroyed by a single fire.

 

[IronWing]

Properly maintained power lines can still arc in heavy smoke from fires not caused by a utility. The power companies have to decide whether to de-energize lines, causing cascading shortages on the grid, or risk starting new fires.

 

[Greenman]

Yes, you have to build and landscape right in higher risk areas. I'm just saying we could stop building into those higher risk areas in the first place by letting people build more in the population centers. It would help broaden tbe risk pool and reduce the proportion of high-risk properties.

The issue is that those high risk areas tend to be beautiful settings for a home, people want to live there and will pay handsomely for the privilege.

 

[Sukhoi]

That is part of the problem is that wildfires are literally a part of the cycle of natures and for decades the US forest service has done everything possible to break that cycle of fire in forests so when a fire does start it is incredibly intense because you decades of brush that built up. You have a combination of forests not properly maintained, you had high winds and then poorly maintained electrical equipment. All of those came together to create a untenable situation. You fix any one of those 3 items and the entire town probably wouldn't have been destroyed by a single fire.

It's not just the USFS. There's a lot of extremely overgrown private property in the foothills as well, and this is long after the 2018-2020 fires so it's not a novel idea anymore. The people that live there just don't give a shit, then cry when their house burns down.

 

[Brovane]

It's not just the USFS. There's a lot of extremely overgrown private property in the foothills as well, and this is long after the 2018-2020 fires so it's not a novel idea anymore. The people that live there just don't give a shit, then cry when their house burns down.

There is I have found personally it is more likely to be empty lots of someone who doesn't have a house on the property. However the vast majority of forest land is either controlled by the state or federal government. They need to do a better job of clearing this brush.

Good video discussing this. California Wildfires 2018 - California's Unsustainable Legacy