"PG&E, a Californian utility, was forced into bankruptcy protection in January after insurers and creditors fled when they concluded that it could be on the hook for billion-dollar liabilities over its possible role in sparking wildfires." Can anyone explain the logic of the sentence?
closed as off-topic by Jim, TimLymington, Jason Bassford, sumelic, jimm101 Feb 25 at 21:40
- This question does not appear to be about English language and usage within the scope defined in the help center.
The sentence does not imply that PG&E sparked or started the wildfires. However, they may have had a role in sparking wildfires. In this particular case, the role that they played is explained in this CNN article:
The company, of course, is not suspected of intentionally causing any fires. Rather, it's under scrutiny for how it maintains its sprawling infrastructure that delivers electricity to some 16 million Californians -- much of it via above-ground power lines running through heavily forested public land.
Last year alone, PG&E equipment caused 17 fires, often after falling branches or trees came into contact with power lines, according to state fire officials. In 11 of those cases, state fire investigators found the company violated codes regarding brush clearance or related violations and referred the matters to local prosecutors for their review.