I agree with
@Ted with respect to the State not letting PG&E go broke. However, things are very unsettled in Sacramento right now with respect to State oversight of PG&E, with talk of possibly breaking PG&E up into several smaller units. My best guess is that nothing will come of this, but it's another unknown factor right now.
With respect to PG&E's liability for last year's fires, the State has allowed PG&E to fund their liabilities with bonds which will be funded by ongoing and future charges to PG&E customers, so these bonds are revenue bonds for all practical purposes.
While it has yet to be determined if PG&E is in fact responsible for the current fire situation, Sacramento is preparing to initiate legislation similar to last year's, again allowing PG&E to fund their liabilities by revenue bonds if that becomes necessary.
I have no idea if the bonds being discussed by
@DavidV are part of this special liability setup, but as long as PG&E is in business they will have revenue, and as long as they have revenue from captive customers who have no choice in the matter, that income revenue seems safe enough.
On another perspective regarding the current fire damage, I've not seen any specific news articles regarding rebuilding, but from very good background knowledge I can note that the current construction labor market in Northern California is already so over-stressed that there is virtually no chance of significant rebuilding in the Paradise area any time within the foreseeable future. All available labor is already fully employed in the Santa Rosa fire ares from last
years fires, and even there it's estimated that additional labor resources won't be available for several
years.