Remix clone Hacker News

Isn't this thing going to be subsidized by taxpayers in the end anyway?

California already a dumb communal insurance thing, the "California FAIR Plan" for people who can't get insurance due to high risk. They force insurance companies who operate in the state to fund it. So basically everyone has to subsidize the high-risk people... but then the insurance companies leave.

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/california-fair-pl...

▲

trilobyte 11 hours ago | parent [-]

As someone who's home insurer pulled out of California and so I had to scramble to find another carrier, I looked at the FAIR plan and it is completely untenable for most people. My insurance was already high, ~$2000/year for coverage that would rebuild our house, and under FAIR it would have gone up to $12000/year.

I mostly agree with the article that insurance is grounded in statistical measures of risk and there's no point railing against it. Norms are going to have to adapt to increased risk and how we build homes and infrastructure needs to shift away from short-term, low-cost thinking to longer-term solutions with a higher-upfront cost and lower TCO given the new constraints. Things like burying power lines, aggressively managing fire danger, and homes that are built to be more sound to natural disasters have to become the status quo.

Most of these things are already possible today. In my neighborhood, PG&E did an assessment and it would cost every homeowner on the street ~$25,000 to have the power lines buried. I would have opened my wallet immediately to reduce the fire risk, but it got caught up in politics and policy. When we had some renovation on our house, my wife and I insisted on some of the work being done in ways that would make the house safer and easier to maintain over the long work. The contractor balked at first saying it would cost us an extra couple of thousand dollars. I had to point out that an extra $3000 to make sure things lasted an extra 5 - 10 years and was easier to maintain and upgrade meant nothing. But people have to insist on doing better because right now the norm is to cut corners on everything to save in many cases a negligible amount of money over the life of the work or against the cost if there is a disaster.

▲

onlypassingthru 10 hours ago | parent [-]

The building codes will need to reflect the new normal. Defensible perimeters, metal roofs and masonry or cementitious exteriors are a must for many areas going forward. Log cabins amongst the pines just aren't tenable in the West any more.

▲

Syonyk 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You say that... but a well built log cabin, with a Class A fire resistant roof, is rather likely to survive a wildfire unbothered if the ground a couple feet around it is kept cleared.

They're simple (not a lot of corners for burning things to wedge in), they tend very well sealed with smaller windows (so less chance of a window breaking and allowing embers in), and the amount of thermal energy it takes to light a full log on fire is quite high. Radiant heat from a forest fire isn't going to bother a log cabin. It might darken the wood somewhat, but it won't light smooth logs on fire. Even random firebrands and such lack the energy to bother wood.

The only concern would be a shake roof - that would catch fire easily and burn the place down. But a well built and "tight" roof (no massive eaves with vents into an attic, just minimal overhangs) of Class A fire resistance would work just fine.

Metal roofing is not inherently fire resistant, either - it depends on the materials, and what's below it. Some metal roofing can transfer enough heat to the wood below to light that on fire, even without direct flame spread. And, non-intuitively, a lot of asphalt shingles are Class A fire resistant when properly installed.

What doesn't work well, obviously, are the sort of expensive homes with "all the architectural features," lots of inside corners that trap debris, and an incredibly complex roofline.

▲

bombcar 6 hours ago | parent [-]

People forget that you don't have to modify a McMansion to whatever requirements you're adding - you can build something entirely different.

"Earthships" or other hobbit-hole like houses are almost completely fireproof as long as the entries are handled correctly - anything that can start a fire through three feet of earth is probably a volcano anyway.

	▲	Syonyk 5 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Don't most of those suffer from serious ongoing humidity problems? I've looked into that style of housing in the past, and it seems like it's always having issues with mold, mildew, and ohter "issues of running 90-100% interior humidity for long periods of time" sort of problems. I think they're okay in drier climates - IIRC they were developed in New Mexico, which is "bone dry nine months of the year, and somewhat drier the other three."

▲

pclmulqdq 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A "log cabin amongst the pines" with a decent sized "yard" clearance area, a good roof, and where the sides of the house are kept reasonably moist is pretty much fireproof.

▲

datavirtue 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Highly suggest clay tile roofs. They last a hell of a lot longer than metal roofs, which have several of their own problems.