No PriorsNo Priors Ep. 98 | With Convective Capital Founder Bill Clerico
CHAPTERS
- 0:00 – 1:01
LA wildfires as the catalyst: framing causes, interventions, and urgency
Elad sets the context around the unfolding Los Angeles fires and introduces Bill Clerico, who now invests in wildfire-related technologies. The conversation is framed as a practical exploration of causes, prevention, response, and recovery—not just a reaction to a single event.
- •LA fire situation is evolving in real time; discussion aims to be broadly applicable
- •Bill’s background: WePay founder turned wildfire-focused investor (Convective Capital)
- •Core questions: what causes mega-fires, what can we do, what technologies matter
- 1:01 – 2:48
Climate change vs. ‘self-inflicted’ drivers: why fires have worsened in the last decade
Bill argues wildfire severity is driven by both climate change and more immediate, addressable factors. He emphasizes that forest management and grid design decisions have played an outsized role in the recent ‘crescendo’ of catastrophic fires.
- •Climate change lengthens and intensifies fire seasons, but isn’t the only driver
- •Forest management and electrical grid choices are acute, fixable contributors
- •Mindset shift: focus on interventions that reduce risk even under a warming climate
- 2:48 – 3:18
Mitigation vs. resilience: why adaptation spending must catch up
Bill highlights an investing imbalance: most climate capital goes to emissions reduction (mitigation) while very little goes to resilience/adaptation. He argues the reality of locked-in warming requires serious investment in wildfire resilience now.
- •~98% of climate capital to mitigation vs. ~2% to resilience/adaptation (as cited)
- •The ‘pendulum’ is beginning to swing toward adaptation and resilience
- •Even with decarbonization, accumulated emissions mean impacts must be managed
- 3:18 – 5:36
Forest fuel overload: how a century of suppression created dense, explosive forests
The discussion explains how the Forest Service’s historic ‘maximum suppression’ approach (e.g., the 10 a.m. policy) reduced frequent low-severity fires, leading to dramatic increases in fuel and forest density. That accumulated fuel, combined with hotter/drier conditions, sets the stage for extreme fire behavior.
- •Forest density/fuel loads have increased dramatically (Bill cites ~3x over ~100 years)
- •10 a.m. policy: put fires out quickly, unintentionally preventing healthy fire cycles
- •Today’s mega-fires result from dense fuels plus dry/hot conditions
- •Core remediation approaches: prescribed fire and mechanical thinning
- 5:36 – 9:09
Regulatory gridlock in land management: permitting delays, lawsuits, and red tape
Elad and Bill dig into how environmental review processes and litigation can slow even basic fuel reduction projects for years. Bill shares a personal example of the complexity and cost of doing conservation-minded timber work under current rules.
- •Personal case: multi-year process and specialized compliance (e.g., spotted owl surveys)
- •Environmental reviews for fuel projects can take ~5–7+ years (as cited)
- •Litigation and policy actions can block streamlined ‘categorical exclusions’
- •High planning overhead: Forest Service budget share devoted to planning (as cited)
- 9:09 – 10:46
Why California lags: prescribed burn culture, risk aversion, and political will
Bill contrasts Florida’s large-scale prescribed burning with California’s much smaller targets, arguing the gap is cultural as much as political. Liability fears and career risk for local leaders discourage controlled burns, even when they’re the safest long-term strategy.
- •Florida burns 2–3M acres/year; California targets ~100k acres (as cited)
- •California lacks workforce comfort and public acceptance of prescribed fire
- •High perceived downside if a prescribed burn escapes; benefit is diffuse/long-term
- •Forest types and risks differ, but culture/politics remain central blockers
- 10:46 – 13:40
Housing in the wildland-urban interface (WUI): how land-use decisions amplify catastrophe
The conversation shifts to how housing scarcity in cities pushes development into high-risk WUI zones. More homes in fire-prone terrain turns large acreage fires into human and economic disasters, and local politics often resist stronger building standards even after devastation.
- •WUI housing growth has surged (Bill cites ~46% since 1980)
- •Fires now affect neighborhoods/cities more directly due to where homes are built
- •Paradise rebuilding: opportunity for stricter codes was rejected as too costly
- •Wildfire risk requires different community design and construction assumptions
- 13:40 – 16:20
Operational response during extreme wind events: structure defense, access failures, and water limits
Bill explains incident phases: initial attack can fail under extreme conditions, forcing a pivot to structure defense. In LA, evacuation traffic and abandoned cars impeded engines from reaching neighborhoods, and water systems weren’t designed for simultaneous large-scale structure loss and depressurization.
- •High winds can make direct suppression of flame fronts infeasible
- •Firefighting shifts to structure defense once initial attack fails
- •Abandoned vehicles blocked access for engines/trucks
- •Water pressure can collapse when many homes burn and plumbing lines open
- 16:20 – 17:27
Water and city infrastructure: what actually broke and what to redesign
Bill pushes back on simplistic claims that more reservoirs would have prevented the Palisades water issues. He points toward system design changes—like modular shutoffs—to preserve pressure and isolate failures during urban firestorms, while noting California’s broader water management issues are real but separate.
- •Key failure mode: depressurization from widespread structural losses, not total water scarcity
- •Potential fix: more modular water networks and shutoff capability by neighborhood
- •Distinguish acute firefighting hydraulics from statewide reservoir politics
- •Post-incident investigations should produce actionable infrastructure learnings
- 17:27 – 19:08
Perimeter hardening: defensible space, building materials, and making homes ‘defendable’
Bill outlines how to keep wildfire from becoming an urban conflagration by hardening the community perimeter. He describes practical measures—from landscaping and materials to road design—that increase the likelihood firefighters can safely defend homes.
- •Goal: stop fire at the perimeter before it becomes house-to-house conflagration
- •Defensible space enforcement; avoid flammable landscaping near structures
- •Home hardening: modern roofing/materials, tempered glass, rooftop sprinklers
- •Urban design matters: driveway width/turnarounds affect firefighter triage decisions
- 19:08 – 21:20
Preventing ignitions: utilities as the highest-leverage target
Bill argues utility-caused ignitions are a minority of starts but drive a majority of damage because they coincide with extreme wind conditions. He describes mitigation options ranging from vegetation management analytics to shutoffs and undergrounding, with cost and public tolerance as constraints.
- •Utilities: ~11% of ignitions but ~50% of damage (as cited)
- •Mitigations: vegetation management, better breakers, PSPS/ESPS shutoffs
- •Undergrounding is effective but expensive (multi-million dollars per mile, as cited)
- •Other causes include lightning and arson; some emerging tech targets lightning risk
- 21:20 – 24:08
Underinvestment and incentives: why utilities and regulators get stuck
Sarah challenges why mitigation is so underfunded; Bill argues utilities are not inherently opposed to capex because regulated returns can reward spending. He places more blame on rate-setting politics and regulatory resistance to bill increases, while acknowledging California’s already-high rates and system waste.
- •Aging equipment example: decades-old components contributing to major failures (Camp Fire anecdote)
- •Utilities’ incentives: regulated model can reward capex; constraint is rate approval politics
- •Tradeoff: wildfire risk isn’t fully priced into electricity rates
- •California rates are high; Bill notes both higher risk and potential system inefficiencies
- 24:08 – 27:07
Insurance market breakdown: why coverage is disappearing and what’s changing
Bill explains how California’s regulated admitted market limited insurers’ ability to price rising and forward-looking wildfire risk, including reinsurance costs. The result was predictable: carriers reduced exposure, pushing homeowners toward the FAIR Plan or the non-admitted market; recent reforms start to allow reinsurance and forward-looking models.
- •Admitted market constraints: reliance on historical models; reinsurance costs historically excluded
- •Reinsurance costs have surged, but pricing couldn’t reflect it under old rules
- •Insurers face exit friction and FAIR Plan surcharges tied to market share
- •Recent shifts: regulator allowing reinsurance costs and forward-looking models (with limits)
- 27:07 – 29:32
Technology and ‘dumb’ resilience: drones, distributed retardant, and homeowner preparedness
Elad presses for tech solutions like drone swarms; Bill says prior limitations were payload and beyond-visual-line-of-sight regulation, both improving rapidly. He also endorses simple, distributed approaches—homeowners keeping gel/retardant and pumps—plus private insurer structure-defense services where feasible.
- •Near-term arc: detection + pre-positioned drones for rapid initial attack and structure defense
- •Enablers: improved drone capability, swarming, and evolving BVLOS regulations
- •Low-tech tactics: retardant/gel stockpiles and applicators for homeowners in WUI
- •Private structure-defense services exist but may be constrained by speed and scale
- 29:32 – 35:46
Recovery and rebuilding LA: faster permits tied to safer standards, plus the politics of change
Bill emphasizes cleanup challenges and argues rebuilding should seize the opportunity to upgrade safety standards, despite cost and underinsurance pressures. He proposes incentives like fast-track permitting for higher-standard rebuilds and argues market forces via freer insurance pricing could drive risk-reducing behavior—paired with public investment in perimeter fuel projects.
- •Post-fire remediation includes hazardous debris and chemical cleanup needs
- •Rebuild ‘the right way’: stronger codes and materials to avoid repeating losses
- •Policy idea: fast-track approvals for homes meeting higher fire-safety standards
- •Broader lever: freer insurance markets to require mitigations as a condition of coverage
- 35:46 – 37:57
What stops mega-fires, and the uncomfortable national security angle
In closing, Bill notes large wildfires are often ultimately constrained by weather shifts, geography (like the ocean), or large aircraft—but aircraft use is limited in neighborhoods. Sarah asks about authoritarian approaches (stricter building limits, surveillance), leading to a final warning: wildfire arson and coordinated ignition could pose a national security threat by overwhelming response capacity.
- •Containment often depends on weather changes, geography, and large-aircraft drops
- •Neighborhood constraints limit the use of massive retardant drops
- •Authoritarian ‘advantages’: stricter building restrictions and expanded surveillance
- •National security risk: coordinated or widespread ignitions could overwhelm systems; critical sites are vulnerable
