Here’s the top transfer-related stories in Monday’s newspapers…Manchester United are on red alert over Gareth Bale after Real Madrid were plunged into a full-blown crisis. Real crashed 4-0 to Barcelona in El Clasico and Bale received heavy criticism for his display. Now United are ready to make a move for the former Tottenham star. (The Sun)Manuel Lanzini, on loan at West Ham from Al Jazira Club, says it is “an honour” for him to be linked with a permanent move to Liverpool. (Independent)Chelsea are ready to enter the race for Sadio Mane. The champions are big admirers of the 23-year-old Senegalese forward who played a key role in Southampton’s 3-1 win over them last month. Mane, who scored in that match, is already being coveted by Manchester United and has scored six times in 17 games so far this season. (Daily Mirror)But Southampton are hoping they can tie Sadio Mane down to a new deal despite the interest from elsewhere. (Daily Express)Liverpool boss Jurgen Klopp wants Lazio midfielder Lucas Biglia but is set to face competition from Manchester United for his signature. (Fichajes)Jesse Lingard is in line for bumper double-your-money talks on a new Manchester United contract. Lingard and his representatives have been invited to open negotiations on a fresh deal as a reward for breaking into the first team and being called up to Roy Hodgson’s England squad (Daily Mirror)Robin van Persie is close to leaving Fenerbahce for a return to Holland with Feyenoord. (Daily Express)Arsenal’s Gedion Zelalem looks set to extend his stay on loan at Rangers until the end of the season. (Metro)
If modern humans left Africa 185,000 years ago or more, why does the oldest language in India date back less than 3% of that time?How old is the oldest human language? It’s tough to say. Using linguistic analysis and statistics, scientists from the Max Planck Institute have estimated the date of the Dravidian family of languages on the southern parts of India at 4,500 years old. Phys.org reports that Dravidians were present a thousand years before Indo-Aryans arrived in India. 80 derived dialects of the ancient language family are still spoken today by some 220 million people.“The study of the Dravidian languages is crucial for understanding prehistory in Eurasia, as they played a significant role in influencing other language groups,” explains corresponding author Annemarie Verkerk of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. Neither the geographical origin of the Dravidian language nor its exact dispersal through time is known with certainty. The consensus of the research community is that the Dravidians are natives of the Indian subcontinent and were present prior to the arrival of the Indo-Aryans (Indo-European speakers) in India around 3,500 years ago. It is likely that the Dravidian languages were much more widespread to the west in the past than they are today.The estimate appears to be on the high side, pushing back the language earlier than previously thought, but not more than 4,500 years in total.The researchers used advanced statistical methods to infer the age and subgrouping of the Dravidian language family at about 4,000-4,500 years old. This estimate, while in line with suggestions from previous linguistic studies, is a more robust result because it was found consistently in the majority of the different statistical models of evolution tested in this study. This age also matches well with inferences from archaeology, which have previously placed the diversification of Dravidian into North, Central, and South branches at exactly this age, coinciding with the beginnings of cultural developments evident in the archaeological record.The paper, published in Royal Society Open Science, cannot rule out 6,000-6,500 years, but concludes that the best-supported date is still 4,500 years ago for the root of the Dravidian language tree. This new date is younger than earlier estimates of 6,000 years or even 13,000 years. In any case, the start date for this language family is far, far younger than evolutionary estimates of the time modern humans have existed in Asia.Coming at this date from another direction, the BBC News had said in January that our species (Homo sapiens) left Africa earlier than thought. Pallab Ghosh wrote,New dating of fossils from Israel indicates that our species (Homo sapiens) lived outside Africa around 185,000 years ago, some 80,000 years earlier than the previous evidence…“We have to rewrite the whole story of human evolution, not just for our own species but all the other species that lived outside of Africa at the time,” the researcher, from Tel Aviv University, explained.Prof Chris Stringer of London’s Natural History Museum, who was not involved in the study, said: “The find breaks the long-established 130,000-year-old limit on modern humans outside of Africa….”The researchers, in fact, believe that even older fossils of modern humans may yet be found in Asia. The article continues pushing dates for human migration back to 250,000 Darwin Years, and possibly more. Ghosh reminds readers of the modern human fossils found in Morocco dating to 315,000 Darwin Years. Ghosh ends,This is much earlier than the generally accepted 200,000-year date for the origin of our species, which is based on genetic studies and fossil finds such as the 195,000-year-old Omo remains from Ethiopia. And it’s possible that future discoveries might push the date back even further.Obviously, one cannot tell from bones what language was spoken by these people. And yet if they were anatomically identical to us, with brains of equal size (sometimes larger on average, as with Neanderthals), it would seem ridiculous to suppose they did not use language, especially when they had the intelligence to migrate across continents.The dates create extreme tension for the evolutionary web of belief. On the one hand, they wish to think that our equals ‘evolved’ over 300,000 years ago, and soon after that migrated into Europe and Asia. Also, when they got there, they had no trouble interbreeding with the Neanderthals. But then, at the other extreme, one of the oldest language groups dates back no more than 4,500 years ago. What did people like us do for 295,000 years? What did they say to one another? Why didn’t they build permanent cities? Did they really live in caves all that time? Why is the first civilization so late in arriving?The tension is forced by evolutionary dating requirements. Darwin needs about 6 million years to get from chimp to champ. All the dates in between are up for grabs, and keep getting shuffled around, as we have reported now for 18 years. Every new find produces the predictable worry, “We have to rewrite the whole story of human evolution.” Why not write out the evolution part? Why not write out the long ages? One would think a theory that fails repeatedly for decades should be first to go.Bible believers are not surprised at the age of the Dravidian language family. It fits very close with estimates of the time of dispersion at the Tower of Babel. Doesn’t it make sense that soon after Babel, those who could understand each other spread out in all directions in tribal groups? Of course it does. That’s what sensible people do. And that’s what the Bible says happened next (Genesis 9-11; the next chapter 12 connects seamlessly with extra-Biblical historical evidence). Clearly, some moved from Babel into the Indian subcontinent, where they found suitable habitat and began multiplying in that region, using their common language. Others moved further east into China, and so for all points on the compass.Language “evolves” by intelligent design, not by natural selection. Once endowed with a common language, people can decide what they want certain words to mean, and what grammatical rules they want to modify for convenience, or to fit new situations. By habit, separate groups will develop dialects, which will diverge further over time. That’s what happened in American English in just a few centuries. Today’s various Dravidian languages and dialects continue to point back to that original grouping that settled in the area long ago after Babel.This implies, of course, that the evolutionary dates of 185,000 years, 250,000 years, 315,000 years, and all the rest of the moyboy mumblings are pure fiction. They never existed. Human history dates back just a few thousand years. Our Creator told us what happened. The evidence fits.(Visited 1,250 times, 2 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
South African musicians will hold a benefit concert on 21 March in Carnival City to help raise funds to help Haiti. (Image: www.mad4haiti.com) RELATED ARTICLES • South Africa reaches out to Haiti • Help for homeless children • Epic run to put smiles on faces MEDIA CONTACTS • Doug Anderson M.A.D 4 Haiti email@example.comNosimilo RamelaSouth African musicians will be hosting a benefit concert in March to raise funds to help Haitians in need.Led by radio presenter Doug Anderson, singer/songwriter/producer Lionel Bastos, and musician Madelaine Steyn, the Making A Difference (M.A.D.) 4 Haiti concert will be held at Carnival City on the 21 March.It will feature a selection of the country’s top artists in a bid to assist the devastated Caribbean nation.South African musicians have opened their hearts and donated their time to bring relief to the victims of the 12 January earthquake, that killed an estimated 230 000 people in the Haitian capital Port-au-Prince.“It started off as a Facebook status update: ‘I want to put on a benefit concert for the Haiti victims – anyone interested in helping out?’” said Anderson. “This was as a result of seeing the visuals coming out of Haiti, shortly after the earthquake.”A few seconds after posting this message, Anderson’s friends started commenting. The first friend on board was Bastos who posted the same status update on his Facebook page – and so M.A.D. 4 Haiti was born.Steyn created a M.A.D 4 Haiti Facebook fan page. Since then, a number of well-known South African musicians have volunteered to perform at the benefit concert. Carnival City has donated the use of the Big Top Arena, which seats 5000 people for the concert. Other companies and individuals have jumped at the chance to come on board and make their services and expertise available free of charge.Singing in one voiceMusic lovers can look forward to seeing well-known artists such as PJ Powers, Denim, Tasha Baxter, Little Sister, and Emmanuel Castis perform at Big Top Arena. Other artists who have come forward to perform include Proverb, Natalie Chapman and Peter Hoven, Walt, Merseystate, the Rainbow Tenors, Josie Field, Bongani , Brian Temba, Auriol Hays, Laurie Levine, Tokyo Groove, Alter Irving, André Schwartz, Evolver One, Concord Nkabinde, Melanie Lowe, Tim Parr and Kathy Raven, Lionel Bastos, Liesl Graham, Holly and the Woods, Tresor Riziky and Cutting Jade.Drawn from a cross-section of music genres and styles, these artists are united in their wish to help the destitute citizens of Haiti. Artists such as Anton Goosen, Tim Parr, Wendy Oldfield and Niki Smart – an expatriate South African singer now living in the US – have donated songs that can be downloaded by the public at: http://rhythmmusicstore.com/music/6223/M.A.D-4-Haiti/M.A.D-4-Haiti.Tickets are priced at between R100 (US$12) and R150 (US$19) at the ticketing agency Computicket. All proceeds from ticket sales will be paid into a trust administered by the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants SA (ACCA SA), and will go towards disaster relief in Haiti.
As we look to create homes and communities that will keep us comfortable and safe in a world of climate change, terrorism, and other vulnerabilities, there are a handful of strategies that I group loosely under the heading of “smarter design.” Some of these strategies come into play more at the land-use planning scale, or are relevant only in certain locations that are at risk of flooding, but all are worth thinking about when planning a new home.Where we buildFollowing Hurricane Katrina’s flooding of New Orleans in 2005, I got involved in an effort to guide the reconstruction that would occur — shifting it towards more sustainable practices. But the very idea of spending billions of dollars to rebuild in a place that is already below sea level at a time when sea levels are projected to rise seemed a mistake. I wrote at the time:“In many respects, New Orleans should not be rebuilt in its present location — a lowland bowl situated between a lake and a river channel where this largest of America’s rivers forms its delta. … Serious consideration should be given to the idea of relocating the city to stable land, either somewhat inland from the coast or farther from the delta where it can be better protected. But there’s almost no chance of that happening. New Orleans will be rebuilt where it is. Our nation has learned a lot in its 200-plus years, but we’re neither that smart nor that bold.” RELATED ARTICLES We need to keep this discussion active. Whether it’s about low-lying coastal areas prone to hurricanes, river floodplains in the Midwest that seem to flood every few years, or valley towns in Vermont prone to flash floods, we should be asking ourselves why we continue to rebuild in places that will again be damaged by flooding.And it’s not just flooding that should concern us. Each summer, when we read about wildfires in the fire-adapted chaparral country of southern California, we should ask ourselves why we keep building in places that keep burning. The frequency of those wildfires is expected to increase as climate change dries out that part of the country.While we may not be able to change land-use laws to fully restrict building in places prone to flooding, fires, and other disasters, we can certainly make those decisions on our own — and not build in vulnerable places. While suitability for development is still often gauged by the 100-year flood elevations, we should be even more conservative and avoid places that are in the 500-year flood elevation. While Vermont’s valley towns are attractive, we should build our houses and roads well above the valley floors. We should try to shift people from the Midwestern river floodplains to higher-elevation areas, increasing density in those safer areas through infill housing.Elevating living spaces and equipmentIn any area remotely vulnerable to flooding, elevating the living space above the potential flood elevation will dramatically reduce damage in the event of flooding. As is commonly done in coastal construction, ground-level spaces can be designed to be inundated with water and dry out. Break-away panels can also reduce damage in the event of flowing water — as in a flooded steam or river.Basements should be avoided where there is risk of flooding, but even when flooding isn’t a concern, it makes sense to elevate all mechanical equipment above a concrete-slab basement floor. A burst water pipe or the failure of a dishwasher or clothes washer can dump thousands of gallons of water that will find its way down to the basement. Elevating boilers, furnaces, water heaters, electrical panels, and any other equipment can dramatically reduce damage. It just makes sense.Wettable materialsJust as we should elevate equipment so it doesn’t get wet in the event of a flood, in locations where flooding could conceivably occur we should use materials that can survive wetting without significant damage. Paper-faced drywall, any kind of wood flooring or subflooring, and wall-to-wall carpeting, for example, should be avoided in finished basements.Instead, consider polished concrete slabs as finished floors, metal studs for interior frame walls in basements, insulation materials that can get wet and dry out (such as rigid mineral wool and polyisocyanurate), and fiberglass-faced or non-paper-faced drywall.More compact homesBuilding smaller houses makes sense for a lot of reasons: less resources to build them, smaller footprint on the land, and less energy to operate. From a resilience standpoint, if power is lost for an extended period of time or heating fuel becomes scarce or supplies cut off, smaller houses are easier to keep safely warm in the winter months using a wood stove or gas-fired space heater (some don’t require electricity to operate, because they have pilot lights and pezioelectric-powered thermostats).I’ll get into more on minimizing heating and cooling loads next week — and why that’s such a critical resilient design strategy.– – – – – –In this resilient design series, I’m covering how to improve the resilience of our homes and communities, including strategies that help our homes survive natural disasters and function well in the aftermath of such events or other circumstances that result in power outages, interruptions in heating fuel, or shortages of water. We’ll see that resilient design is a life-safety issue that is critical for the security and wellbeing of families in a future of climate uncertainty and the ever-present risk of terrorism. Defining Habitable Temperatures Designing Homes and Communities That Can Survive a DisasterResilient CommunitiesResilient Design: Passive Solar HeatResilient Design: Dramatically Better Building EnvelopesResilience: Designing Homes for More Intense StormsMaking the Case for Resilient DesignBuilding Resilience for a ‘Close Encounter’ with DisasterGreen Building Priority #9 – Create Resilient HousesMaking Houses Resilient to Power Outages Alex is founder of BuildingGreen, Inc. and executive editor of Environmental Building News. To keep up with his latest articles and musings, you can sign up for his Twitter feed.
Most wood pellets originate in the U.S.As the European Commission called an international stakeholder meeting to consult on the future of its bioenergy policy, I traveled to Brussels to attend and to bring NRDC’s evidence to the table. Overwhelmingly, the biomass we’re burning is coming from the wood pellet mills of the U.S. Southeast. The region is now the world’s top exporter of wood for energy production. Misguided bioenergy policy in the EU is driving demand for wood pellets from these forests, putting millions of uncounted tons of carbon into the atmosphere and putting at risk some of the world’s most biodiverse and precious forests.On the way to the Commission building came a sobering moment when we passed Maelbeek Metro Station, where flowers reminded of the recent bomb attack. Once past security and inside the building, we arrived in an oval-shaped room packed with EU politicians, scientists, and representatives of industry and civil society.Right at the top, the European Commission’s representative acknowledged the remarkable fact that more than 56,000 supporters of NRDC and its allies had written to the Commission to express their concern about the destruction of U.S. forests, asking them to stop incentivizing the use of trees for fuel in EU renewable energy policies.After that, much of the day was taken up by bioenergy industry representatives restating their positions, at one point provoking unintentional hilarity when citing the production of oxygen by plants as an argument to continue unabated bioenergy incentives.But then the science panel was called and made some remarkably clear statements: Despite some disagreement over exact figures for various bioenergy scenarios, they all agreed that bioenergy is not carbon-neutral. (One scientist sneakily called it “70% carbon-neutral,” which of course means not carbon-neutral). Decision due by the end of the yearWe simply can’t wait decades to begin reducing carbon emissions from our power sector, all the while destroying the very forests that are one of our best tools for fighting climate change and providing a host of other ecosystem services. The question now is: How will the European Commission respond to this evidence, including its own research body stating that bioenergy is “definitely not carbon-neutral”?Today, millions in European taxpayer resources — money that could be used to support truly clean energy technologies, such as solar and wind — is wasted on a dirty form of electricity that destroys forests and worsens climate change rather than mitigating it.A proposal on how to reform EU bioenergy renewables policy is expected by the end of the year. In the meantime, we need to keep the pressure on policymakers and make sure the EU’s 2030 climate and energy package does not continue to drive the destruction of U.S. forests in the name of renewable energy. Europe Drives Up Demand for U.S. Wood Pellets NRDC: Burning Trees to Make Electricity is an ‘Environmental Disaster’ Biomass Electricity Production: How Green Is It?Do Wood-Burning Power Plants Make Sense?Two Biomass Plants in Maine to CloseShould Green Homes Burn Wood? RELATED ARTICLES The facts on carbon neutralityNRDC had recently demonstrated the real carbon emissions of using wood pellets sourced from Southeastern forests to produce electricity used for bioenergy, which found that when pellets are comprised of anywhere from 40% to 70% whole trees, it takes approximately 55 years for forest regrowth to recapture enough carbon from the atmosphere to reduce a power station’s cumulative emissions below those of coal. At levels greater than 40%, pellets emit more carbon than coal for most of this period.Echoing these findings, Lisa Marelli, the scientist from the EU Commission’s own research body, the Joint Research Centre (JRC), demonstrated that the use of forest biomass can actually result in a worsening of climate change over a period of over 40 years or more (depending on decay rates were that biomass to instead be left on the forest floor).Asked whether bioenergy can be assumed carbon-neutral, Marelli responded with an emphatic “definitely not.”These are strong words from a representative of the Commission’s own research body. Unfortunately, they are in direct conflict with current EU policy, which still assumes all bioenergy to be inherently carbon-neutral and encourages EU member states to subsidize it as such.Over the course of the day, the European Commission also heard evidence from stakeholders on the negative impacts on biodiversity and on affected communities. Staff from allied European NGOs and I were able to relay how, on a recent trip to the Southeast, we saw firsthand the devastating clearcuts of threatened bottomland hardwood forest that previously had been teeming with wildlife. Since 2010, the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Our Forests Aren’t Fuel campaign to save southeastern forests from logging for bioenergy has sounded the alarm about this issue and targeted the European Union for reform.In 2009, the EU passed binding legislation to ensure the EU meets its climate and energy targets, including a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, a requirement that 20% of EU energy be generated from renewable sources, and a 20% improvement in energy efficiency, all by 2020.While laudable, the policy package came with a gaping loophole around bioenergy: all biomass, whether wood chips and sawdust from a sawmill or whole trees from old-growth forests, was considered “carbon-neutral.” In other words, when biomass is burned in European power stations, the EU acts like the carbon emissions coming out of the smokestack simply don’t exist.And we’re talking about a lot of emissions. The latest and best science tells us that when we burn many forms of biomass for electricity — in particular whole trees and other large-diameter wood — carbon emissions increase for decades compared to coal. Today, nearly two-thirds of the EU’s renewables target is being met by burning biomass. Kenneth Richter is a consultant to NRDC based in Germany. He has been working on biomass issues for eight years. This post originally appeared at the NRDC blog.
About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Arsenal youngster Maitland-Niles raps Xhaka and… Emery!by Paul Vegasa month agoSend to a friendShare the loveArsenal youngster Ainsley Maitland-Niles has questioned manager Unai Emery’s approach for their 2-2 draw at Watford.The Gunners academy star has also questioned club captain Granit Xhaka’s claim that his team were “scared”.Maitland-Niles believes Arsenal should have been streetwise enough to have mixed up their game-plan of playing out from the back.He told Sky Sports: “Words can’t describe how I feel about it.”I don’t think (that the team was scared), I think we tried to play the way we played. We should have changed it instead of being so persistent and trying to play out from the back.”We’ve spoken to each other as a team and the manager has also spoken to us.”We know we’ve done wrong, we can all hold our hands up and blame each other if we wanted to, but we’re a team and we take the responsibility as a team to be better.”
New York: Veteran actor Rishi Kapoor has praised actress Sara Ali Khan saying she has set an example on how celebrities should behave at the airport. “Wonderful Sara. You set examples how celebrities should behave at the airport. No harm at all tugging your own baggage, no chamchas to receive and the icing on the cake! No dark glasses or an airport look,” the yesteryaer heartthrob, who is currently undergoing treatment here tweeted. “You show confidence with no insecurities. Atta girl,” he added. The “Bobby” actor retweeted an article that mentioned that Sara was seen carrying her own luggage at the airport.
TORONTO – The grieving mother of a young Indigenous man killed by police in northern Ontario spoke out Thursday, saying the family remains in shock and still doesn’t understand why her son died.In a statement from the remote community of Fort Albany, Ont., Micheline Knapaysweet said the family needs answers about the death of her son, Joey Knapaysweet.“What did he do that was so bad that he had to be shot and killed?” Micheline Knapaysweet said. “I am so heartbroken, with so many questions unanswered.”Police in Timmins, Ont., shot 21-year-old Joey Knapaysweet on Feb. 3, in an as-yet unexplained incident that raised racial tensions in the city and sparked anger from the Indigenous community.The province’s police watchdog, the Special Investigations Unit, is looking into the incident and has said officers responded mid-morning to a health-care building and a man fled.“There was an interaction between the man and officers, and one of the officers discharged a firearm,” the unit said in a statement. “The man was struck. He was taken to hospital where he was later pronounced dead.”His death prompted scores of people to attend a vigil — among them Timmins Mayor Steve Black — and denunciation from Indigenous leaders.Joey Knapaysweet was from the James Bay community of Fort Albany — more than an hour’s flight from Timmins. He had gone to Timmins to “seek help in dreams for betterment of his life,” according to his mother’s statement.His mother also released two photographs, including the last one of them together just before he left home.“I cannot sleep at nights, I need answers,” she said. “This is my son, my child.”The family asked for privacy, saying they were not yet ready to speak directly to the media.Black, who urged calm after what he said was a rare shooting, has acknowledged that relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in the city took a hit.Knapaysweet died the same weekend as Agnes Sutherland, an ailing 62-year-old also from Fort Albany, who had been in police custody after an incident at a shelter. The Special Investigations Unit is looking into her death as well.The deaths, along with the acquittal last week of white farmer Gerald Stanley in Saskatchewan in the 2016 killing of a young Cree man, Coulten Boushie, have cast a harsh spotlight in recent weeks on attitudes toward Indigenous people.The Stanley verdict sparked protests across the country along with condemnation from the federal justice minister, with critics calling the justice system biased against Indigenous people.
The lead developer behind Calgary’s East Village revitalization project is hitting a number of milestones in the downtown community this year, with a major residential complex, the new Central Library and the Alt Hotel — all opening in 2018.The Calgary Municipal Land Corporation is also getting ready to unveil a master plan vision for an Entertainment and Cultural District, and it’s hoping that will include one major component.“Obviously there’s discussions about a future arena, we want to incorporate that into our plan,” said CEO and president Michael Brown. “It’s really important that Victoria Park has the amenities that we’ve seen benefit East Village and that in itself is going to be used to attract residents.”Brown made the comments at the St. Louis Hotel on Monday, after an announcement that the new Central Library partnered with Lukes Drug Mart’s Gareth Lukes and chef Eric Hendry, who will be operating a cafe in the library.CMLC is focusing on existing amenities in East Village this year, but it said a big part of discussions around developing the neighbouring Victoria Park area will be incorporating a new arena.Ward 7 councillor Druh Farrell doesn’t believe the East Village needs an arena to thrive because there’s national buzz about the community that isn’t even finished yet.“Already it’s become a major draw, but as far as Victoria Park is concerned, it needs some TLC. It needs some work. And it can work without an arena, but an arena would help. We need to look at the options,” said Farrell.Part of the development plan will be to examine infrastructure such as the railway between the two neighbourhoods, which CMLC sees as a barrier.“The railway was such an instrumental part in ensuring Calgary was what it is, but also can be a limiting factor in terms of growth. So we’re going work on how do we connect those up. The reality is if I could look on one side from East Village to Victoria Park and it takes me 10 to 15 minutes to walk there, that’s not a good thing. I need it a lot easier to get through those communities,” said Brown.CMLC also plans another announcement for next week for a building that will attract a “creative class” to East Village.
SAN FRANCISCO — Regulators are accusing one of California’s largest utilities of falsifying safety documents on natural gas pipelines over a five-year period.The California Public Utilities Commission said Friday that an investigation by its staff found Pacific Gas & Electric Co. lacked enough employees to fulfil requests to find and mark natural gas pipelines.Regulators say that because of the staff shortage, PG&E pressured supervisors and locators to complete the work, leading staff to falsify data from 2012 to 2017.A U.S. judge fined the utility $3 million after it was convicted of six felony charges for failing to properly maintain a natural gas pipeline that exploded south of San Francisco in 2010, killing eight people.PG&E didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.The Associated Press