Business
Altadena asked Edison to bury power lines. Some fire victims say that could cost them $40,000
Connor Cipolla, an Eaton wildfire survivor, last year praised Southern California Edison’s plan of burying more than 60 miles of electric lines in Altadena as it rebuilds to reduce the risk of fire.
Then he learned he would have to pay $20,000 to $40,000 to connect his home, which was damaged by smoke and ash, to Edison’s new underground line. A nearby neighbor received an estimate for $30,000, he said.
“Residents are so angry,” Cipolla said. “We were completely blindsided.”
Other residents have tracked the wooden stakes Edison workers put up, showing where crews will dig. They’ve found dozens of places where deep trenches are planned under oak and pine trees that survived the fire. In addition to the added costs they face, they fear many trees will die as crews cut their roots.
“The damage is being done now and it’s irreversible,” homeowner Robert Steller said, pointing Maiden Lane to where an Edison crew was working.
For a week, Steller, who lost his home in the fire, parked his Toyota 4Runner over a recently dug trench. He said he was trying to block Edison’s crew from burying a large transformer between two towering deodar cedar trees. The work would “be downright fatal” to the decades-old trees, he said.
Altadena resident Robert Steller stands in front of his Toyota 4Runner that he parked strategically to prevent a Southern California Edison crew from digging too close to two towering cedar trees.
(Ronaldo Bolaños / Los Angeles Times)
The buried lines are an upgrade that will make Altadena’s electrical grid safer and more reliable, Edison says, and it also will lower the risk that the company would have to black out Altadena neighborhoods during dangerous Santa Ana winds to prevent fires.
Brandon Tolentino, an Edison vice president, said the company was trying to find government or charity funding to help homeowners pay to connect to the buried lines. In the meantime, he said, Edison decided to allow owners of homes that survived the fire to keep their overhead connections until financial help was available.
Tolentino added that the company planned meetings to listen to residents’ concerns, including about the trees. He said crews were trained to stop work when they find tree roots and switch from using a backhoe to digging by hand to protect them.
“We’re minimizing the impact on the trees as we [put lines] underground or do any work in Altadena,” he said.
Although placing cables underground is a fire prevention measure, consumer advocates point out it’s not the most cost-effective step Edison can take to reduce the risk.
Undergrounding electric wires can cost more than $6 million per mile, according to the state Public Utilities Commission, far more than building overhead wires.
Because utility shareholders put up part of the money needed to pay for burying the lines, the expensive work means they will earn more profit. Last year, the commission agreed Edison investors could earn an annual return of 10.03% on that money.
Edison said in April it would spend as much as $925 million to underground and rebuild its grid in Altadena and Malibu, where the Palisades fire caused devastation. That amount of construction spending will earn Edison and its shareholders more than $70 million in profit before taxes — an amount billed to electric customers — in the first year, according to calculations by Mark Ellis, the former chief economist for Sempra, the parent company of Southern California Gas and San Diego Gas & Electric.
That annual return will continue over the decades while slowly decreasing each year as the assets are depreciated, Ellis said.
“They’re making a nice profit on this,” he said.
Tolentino said the company wasn’t doing the work to profit.
“The primary reason for undergrounding is the wildfire mitigation,” he said. “Our focus is supporting the community as they rebuild.”
It’s unclear if the Eaton fire would have been less disastrous if Altadena’s neighborhood power lines had been buried. The blaze ignited under Edison’s towering transmission lines that run down the mountainside in Eaton Canyon. Those lines carry bulk power through Edison’s territory. The power lines being put underground are the smaller distribution lines, which carry power to homes.
A power line outside the home of Altadena resident Connor Cipolla.
(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)
The investigation into the fire’s cause has not yet been released. Edison says a leading theory is that one of the Eaton Canyon transmission lines, which hadn’t carried power for 50 years, might have briefly reenergized, sparking the blaze. The fire killed 19 people and destroyed more than 9,000 homes, businesses and other structures.
Edison said it has no plans to bury those transmission lines.
The high cost of undergrounding has become a contentious issue in Sacramento because, under state rules, most or all of it is billed to all customers of the utility.
Before the Eaton fire, Edison won praise from consumer advocates by installing insulated overhead wires that sharply cut the risk of the lines sparking a fire for a fraction of the cost. Since 2019, the company has installed more than 6,800 miles of the insulated wires.
“A dollar spent reconductoring with covered conductor provides … over four times as much value in wildfire risk mitigation as a dollar spent on underground conversion,” Edison said in testimony before the utilities commission in 2018.
By comparison, Pacific Gas & Electric has relied more on undergrounding its lines to reduce the risk of fire, pushing up customer utility bills. Now Edison has shifted to follow PG&E’s example.
Mark Toney, executive director of the the Utility Reform Network, a consumer group in San Francisco, said his staff estimates Edison spends $4 million per mile to underground wires compared with $800,000 per mile for installing insulated lines.
By burying more lines, customer bills and Edison’s profits could soar, Toney said.
“Five times the cost is equal to five times the profit,” he said.
Last spring, Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, told Gov. Gavin Newsom about the company’s undergrounding plans in a letter. Pizarro wrote that rules at the utility commission would require Altadena and Malibu homeowners to pay to underground the electric wire from their property line to the panel on their house. He estimated it would cost $8,000 to $10,000 for each home.
Residents who need to dig long trenches may pay far more than that, said Cipolla, who is a member of the Altadena Town Council.
An oak tree stands tall in an area impacted by the Eaton fires. Homeowners worry such trees could be at risk in the undergrounding work.
(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)
Last week, Cipolla showed a reporter the electrical panel on the back of his house, which is many yards away from where he needs to connect to Edison’s line. The company also initially wanted him to dig up the driveway he poured seven years ago, he said. Edison later agreed to a location that avoids the driveway.
Tolentino said Edison’s crews were working with homeowners concerned about the company’s planned locations for the buried lines.
“We understand it is a big cost and we’re looking at different sources to help them,” he said.
At the same time, some residents are fuming that, despite the undergrounding work, most of the town’s neighborhoods still will have overhead telecommunications lines. In other areas of the state, the telecommunications companies have worked with the electric utilities to bury all the lines, eliminating the visual clutter.
So far, the telecom companies have agreed to underground only a fraction of their lines in Altadena, Tolentino said.
Cipolla said Edison executives told him they eventually plan to chop off the top of new utility poles the company installed after the fire, leaving the lower portion that holds the telecom lines.
“There is no beautification aspect to it whatsoever,” Cipolla said.
As for the trees, Steller and other residents are asking Edison to adjust its construction map to avoid digging near those that remain after the fire. Altadena lost more than half of its tree cover in the blaze and as crews cleared lots of debris.
1
2
3
1. A pedestrian walks past Christmas Tree lane in Altadena. Christmas Tree Lane was officially listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1990. 2. A “We Love Altadena” sign hangs from a shrub on Christmas Tree Lane. 3. Parts of a chopped down tree rest on a street curb in Altadena.
Wynne Wilson, a fire survivor and co-founder of Altadena Green, pointed out that the lot across the street from the giant cedar trees on Maiden Lane has no vegetation, making it a better place for Edison’s transformer.
“This is needless,” Wilson said. “People are dealing with so much. Is Edison thinking we won’t fight over this?”
Carolyn Hove, raising her voice to be heard over the crew operating a jackhammer in front of her home, asked: “How much more are we supposed to go through?”
Hove said she doesn’t blame the crews of subcontractors the utility hired, but Edison’s management.
“It’s bad enough our community was decimated by a fire Edison started,” she said. “We’re still very traumatized, and then to have this happen.”
Earlier this year, a widely circulated 15-second AI-generated video of Brad Pitt fighting Tom Cruise on a rooftop sparked outrage across Hollywood. One screenwriter called the cinematic clip “terrifying.” The Motion Picture Assn. demanded the company behind the artificial intelligence tool — Chinese tech giant ByteDance — halt its “infringing activity.”
Despite the uproar, the former majority owner of TikTok has quietly continued to court filmmakers, independent artists and executives who are eager to adopt the AI video generation model called Seedance.
Seedance was launched in the U.S. this spring at a Santa Monica event hosted by a group linked to the Chinese government.
ByteDance began hiring for 100 open roles, signed multiple independent filmmakers and artists and held private conversations about financing AI films. The company threw a lavish caviar party at Cannes and in May hosted panels promoting its cinematic tool at Amazon’s AI on the Lot event in Culver City.
“Like any new technology, Hollywood ultimately has no choice but to react to market realities. And that reality is that the new crop of AI-empowered Hollywood creatives see Seedance as having the most powerful video generator in the market right now,” said Peter Csathy of Creative Media, an entertainment and AI business advisory firm.
Joel Kuwahara, the animation producer on early seasons of “The Simpsons,” echoed Hollywood’s quiet embrace.
“Within the industry, I know that a lot of studios haven’t approved Seedance, but yet with a wink and a nod, they’re allowing Seedance to be used. … It’s kind of like a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ kind of a thing,’” Kuwahara told The Times.
ByteDance declined to comment on its U.S. expansion.
The race to build the dominant AI video model has created a fierce rivalry, pitting U.S. companies against the fast-closing Chinese competitors. On the American side, there are Google Veo and startups such as Runway and Luma. OpenAI’s Sora has discontinued its video tool.
The Chinese challengers Seedance, Kling and Alibaba’s HappyHorse have rapidly closed the gap on cinematic realism and have upstaged their American rivals by undercutting them on cost.
According to Artificial Analysis, a company that tracks cost and performances of different AI models, China’s Seedance is currently the most cost-effective and high-quality option compared with U.S. competitors. Seedance costs $9 per minute for video with audio generation, significantly lower than the $24 per minute required by Google’s Veo model.
That makes it an attractive tool for independent filmmakers like Rupert Wainwright, who recently met with Seedance executives at AI on the Lot.
He wants to use the the tool to help make his feature-length film called “Sebastian,” about a Christian saint set in 3rd century Rome. The hybrid AI film will be shot partly on location in Europe and partly generated with artificial intelligence.
“It’s the equivalent to when streaming a movie over the internet onto your TV finally became possible,” Wainwright said.
Kavan Cardoza.
(Kayla Bartkowski/Los Angeles Times)
A scene from “The Chronicles of Bone.”
(Kayla Bartkowski/Los Angeles Times)
In May, Steven Schneider, the producer of “Paranormal Activity,” famous for its handheld grainy footage-style filmmaking, announced “Terrarium,” his first hybrid AI horror production. The film’s director, Jason Zada, said it will be entirely generated using Seedance’s model.
Zada’s filmmaking workflow involves writing, casting, prompting and editing all simultaneously, allowing him to rewrite scripts based on “dailies” generated by AI that day.
He estimates that generating 15 seconds of high-definition video costs only $5.
“We could go from a very detailed outline, very detailed characters and have it be a bit more fluid, because we could regen[erate] as much as we want,” Zada said.
Zada plans to shoot the movie first on a soundstage with real actors and will decide later which parts work better traditionally and what should be done synthetically. He’s a member of the Directors Guild of America and said he will be employing union actors for his hybrid AI film.
Seedance also has continued building ties by offering indie creators, AI-native studios and filmmakers free monthly credits and access to unreleased features. These “tastemakers” beta test its models, offer feedback on what works, and use it for their personal filmmaking projects — which creates corporate brand awareness.
Kavan Cardoza is one such breakout filmmaker. His AI fantasy series, “The Chronicle of Bones,” which uses Seedance, features half a dozen distinct storylines and an ensemble of characters. New episodes, each not more than 30 minutes, are released on YouTube once a month. The solo filmmaker averages 3 million views per episode and has cultivated a YouTube audience of 500,000.
Most filmmakers are tool agnostic, but lately Cardoza has become completely dependent on Seedance, he said, because it solves a persistent problem: maintaining character consistency between shots.
Kavan Cardoza unmasked.
(Kayla Bartkowski/Los Angeles Times)
To create one of his characters, “the last lost boy,” Cardoza took self-portraits wearing a three-faced mask and a tattered brown jacket. He used those reference images for the AI character and transforms them into a stylized person, with a personality, backstory and visual details. He fed those images back to Seedance to get consistent characters — repeating the process for each member of the cast.
“I can’t go get Brad Pitt because he costs like $5, 10, 20 million to be in my film,” Cardoza said. “I can probably get a synthetic actor that will act just as good as Brad Pitt in the future. That’s crazy to me.”
Cardoza has copyrighted his script and characters, and aims to eventually attract major studio interest to turn his intellectual property into a film which comes with a built-in fan base.
Such plans are likely to face resistance from the performers union SAG-AFTRA, which has decried the use of synthetic actors such as Tilly Norwood.
“The rise of Seedance comes down to [its] focus on pleasing filmmakers and making things that look filmic,” said Stephan Vladimir Bugaj, senior vice president of JioStar, a joint venture between Disney and India’s Reliance Industries.
ByteDance introduced timeline-based prompting so filmmakers can actually pick specific moments and tweak them, and improved the understanding of camera direction, physics, lighting and fluidity of action. All of this, Bugaj said, “unlocked a kind of spectacle filmmaking that the other models are not delivering quite as well.”
The company’s tool has been in such high demand, Zada said, that Seedance has been quoting some major Hollywood studios $2 million for unrestricted special access.
While acknowledging Seedance’s popularity and its U.S. expansion, Amit Jain, chief executive of Luma, said its ceiling in Hollywood is severely limited. Traditional studios might adopt Chinese models for some preproduction tasks such as concepting, but the geopolitical and intellectual property risks for commercial generations are too prohibitive.
“Can you imagine Disney using the ByteDance model for the next ‘Snow White’? No way,” Jain said. “This is not even a technical argument, really. That’s the reality.”
Luma has been making inroads into Hollywood selling its software but has separately funded a production service company to teach filmmakers to make hybrid AI films using its tools.
Despite conservative production budgets, AI spending by media companies is projected to grow from $2.6 billion to $12.5 billion from 2024 to 2029, according to a State of Generative AI Media report.
Kavan Cardoza flips through pages of his fine-art photography book.
(Kayla Bartkowski/Los Angeles Times)
Bugaj warned that the quality and competitive price of Chinese models should be a “wake-up call” for American players fighting for market share.
“We’re not loyal,” said Zada, the filmmaker. “Whatever is the best, we’re going to use it.”
Nearly a year after the expiration of a $7,500 federal tax incentive for new electric vehicles, California is stepping in to try to motivate buyers to go electric.
Gov. Gavin Newsom allocated $135 million in his new state budget to provide incentives for new and used EVs. Participating automakers will match the funds.
California leads the nation in EV adoption, though the market has taken a hit under the Trump administration.
The state budget — a more than $350-billion spending plan — went into effect Wednesday. The EV incentives will take effect in the coming weeks as the California Air Resources Board irons out agreements with dealerships.
Here’s what you need to know.
What are the incentives worth?
Senate Bill 168 tasked the California Air Resources Board with setting incentive amounts for new and used electric vehicles sold in California.
Eligible buyers will receive $3,500 off for new EVs and $1,750 off for used ones. Unlike the federal tax credits that expired in September, these incentives offer an instant discount and don’t require buyers to apply for credit later.
State funds will cover half of the incentive amount, and auto manufacturers will cover the other half.
The rebates will mean that most eligible buyers will effectively get between 4% and 7% of their money back.
For used EVs, “this incentive helps what’s already a good deal become an even better deal,” said auto analyst Brian Moody. “I think that’s the perfect use of these kinds of dollars.”
What are the rules and exceptions?
The new incentives can’t be used on all electric vehicles — they apply only to new EVs with a manufacturer’s suggested retail price of $50,000 or less, and used EVs with a sale price of $25,000 or less.
The $50,000 maximum rules out many options on the market, but legislation outlining the incentive program makes a special exception for California-based companies. Buyers purchasing a new or used EV from a company with headquarters in California can claim the discount regardless of the vehicle price.
That’s good news for Lucid, with headquarters in Newark, Calif., and for Irvine-based Rivian. Neither company currently offers new vehicles for less than $50,000. Rivian said it plans to launch a $44,990 SUV in 2027.
Who is eligible?
California’s new EV discounts are available only to first-time EV buyers, according to the legislation.
SB 168 says the buyer’s eligibility will be “confirmed by a buyer attestation” that they have not previously owned a zero-emission vehicle.
The new EV incentive is less than half of the federal incentive that expired nine months ago. Whereas the federal incentive may have been enough to spark interest in a range of buyers, Moody said the lesser amount will probably appeal mainly to people who already have their eye on an EV.
“I think you have to already be considering it, or in the market,” Moody said. “I think that the amount is just right for that.”
What are California’s clean car goals?
The incentives are intended to help California reach its electric vehicle and air quality goals as those targets have been under fire from President Trump.
Shortly after taking office, Trump signed an executive order that revoked California’s authority to set its own EV regulations, which included a goal of having 100% of new vehicle sales in the state be zero-emission by 2035.
California sued the administration in response. The state also has goals, including some that have been in place since 2012, that set declining limits on smog-causing pollutants and required automakers to sell increasing percentages of electric and hybrid vehicles through 2025.
In March, the administration filed a new lawsuit again trying to block California’s ability to set stricter-than-federal emissions standards for cars.
Early this year, California announced that more than 2.5 million zero-emission vehicles had been sold in the state since 2010, surpassing a target to put 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles on the road by 2025.
Business
Want an AI-proof job? New research says you may be safer at companies embracing the technology
While AI is often cited as one of the reasons for mass layoffs, particularly in the tech sector, for fast-growing companies it also seems to be creating new jobs in many companies, according to a study published Tuesday from financial services company Ramp and employment database Revelio Labs.
“Our early result is that it looks like firms are starting to look for more entry-level hires, likely people who are more AI native,” said Ara Kharazian, the lead economist at Ramp, a financial services company that found a rise in early-career hiring by companies in the period they started spending heavily on AI.
The study tracked AI spending and the workforce records of nearly 22,000 U.S. companies between January 2021 and February 2026.
It found that firms that spent more on AI ended up increasing their workforce headcount by an average of 10% over the two years after rolling out the technology. Companies that made the largest AI investment expanded entry-level job hiring by 12%.
“If you are a job seeker, or you are graduating from college, and you’re choosing between two different firms that are otherwise similar, I would choose the one that’s using AI,” Kharazian said. “Our paper shows that that firm is going to grow faster.”
The early and intense AI adopters spent more than $100 per month per employee on AI and had their employees using advanced AI, such as coding subscriptions, as opposed to simple ChatGPT subscriptions.
The low-intensity, casual AI adopters didn’t see any hiring gains and reduced headcount.
The Ramp study showed a positive effect on employment from AI because it focused on firms adopting AI, many of them fast-growing, venture-backed companies hiring AI-native junior employees.
It reached a different conclusion than a November 2025 Stanford University study, which examined payroll data across the entire labor market and found that employment among young software developers had declined by nearly 20% from its late-2022 peak.
The two findings can both be true, Kharazian said, because the Stanford study was broader and didn’t focus just on the firms that use AI.
“While there may be overall weak hiring for young people, what we found is that hiring is actually strong at the firms that use AI, and the firms that use AI intensely,” he said.
In another recent study on the impact of AI on jobs, the California AI-unemployment tracker examined the state across industries, education levels and region and highlighted some worrying trends.
It seemed to disprove the understanding that AI has been hurting mostly younger employees and those in entry-level jobs.
It found that unemployment insurance claims among college-educated workers in high-AI-exposed jobs, such as customer service and software development, increased after ChatGPT’s release in 2022 and remained elevated through May 2026.
Unemployment insurance claims among master’s and PhD holders in highly AI-exposed occupations have also risen, moving from a baseline average of 13,000 claims per month in November 2022 to between 16,000 and 22,000 claims per month since mid-2023, the study found.
The study also categorized unemployment claims by age and found that a significant portion of claims were from those aged 36 to 65, signaling that AI’s effect doesn’t only affect early-career jobs.
It also found a higher rate of insurance claims in the San Francisco Bay Area compared with the rest of California, and that job loss claims were concentrated in the technology sector.
In 2026, tech companies have let go of more than 160,000 workers, according to trueup.io, a website tracking industry layoffs.
Many companies have said AI was one of the main reasons for layoffs. Meta, Oracle, Microsoft and other big tech companies have laid off tens of thousands of employees, while simultaneously investing billions in AI data centers.
Ramp’s findings that heavy AI adoption can lead to increased hiring suggests that some of the companies announcing large layoffs may be guilty of blaming regular cost cutting on AI, a practice dubbed “AI washing.”
“When you hear CEOs talk about layoffs and they attribute it to AI, I would be skeptical,” Kharazian said.
-
Technology5 minutes agoChina’s robot-run hotel opens to public in 2027
-
Business12 minutes ago
China-backed AI tool behind fake Brad Pitt fight making Hollywood inroads
-
Entertainment15 minutes agoDon Was produced the Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan and Ozzy. At 73, he found his voice in Detroit — and the Dead
-
Politics27 minutes agoCommentary: Happy Birthday, America! You’ve weathered another rough year
-
Sports35 minutes agoDodgers’ Eliezer Alfonzo praying his sister and stepmother will be found in Venezuela
-
World45 minutes agoReform UK’s Farage failed to disclose funds from convicted criminal: Report
-
News1 hour agoPaul Pelosi in hit-and-run in California, car left with major damage, authorities say
-
Los Angeles, Ca3 hours agoFirefighters battle Fourth of July blazes around Los Angeles
