PG&E and Southern California Edison have turned off power to minimize fires. It hasn't worked. What will?
Jorge L. Ortiz- Wildfires started by power lines spiked from a five-year average of 296 to 408 in 2017, according to Cal Fire data.
- The cost to bury power lines would be as much as $3 million per mile, compared to $800,000 per mile overhead, according to PG&E calculations.
- California Gov. Gavin Newsom is leading calls for PG&E to be disbanded: “I want as many people bidding for the assets of Pacific Gas & Electric as possible.”
SAN FRANCISCO – Pacific Gas & Electric may get to share the title of California’s Public Enemy No. 1.
The embattled energy giant has been repeatedly castigated by the public and government leaders for its role in the state’s devastating wildfires the last three years, and for its clumsy attempt at preventing them this fall with mass power outages.
But PG&E is not alone, and recent developments may shift some of the finger-pointing to its brethren downstate, especially Southern California Edison.
The energy provider for approximately 15 million people confirmed Wednesday it had an active transmission line near the spot where the Easy Fire ignited early that morning in Simi Valley, promptly spreading over several hundred acres and threatening the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.
That came a day after SCE acknowledged its equipment “could be found to have been associated with the ignition of the Woolsey Fire,’’ the November 2018 inferno that charred close to 100,000 acres of Ventura and Los Angeles counties and destroyed more than 1,600 structures.
No way to live:With raging fires, high winds and blackouts, California is living a disaster movie. Is this the 'new normal'?
Last year, SCE took responsibility for accidentally setting off the 2017 Thomas Fire, which consumed almost 282,000 acres in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties and destroyed more than 1,000 structures.
This week, a broken tree branch that hit a line operated by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power – which services more than 4 million – was blamed for starting the Getty Fire, which has burned 12 homes and forced thousands out of their houses.
So, despite the repeated Public Safety Power Shutoffs that left millions of Californians in the dark through parts of October, residents still can’t be certain they won’t get an emergency call to flee immediately because of a fast-approaching blaze.
Cal Fire: Wildfires caused by power lines are becoming more common
Such was the case for many Sonoma County residents when the Kincade Fire broke out Oct. 23, at a time when PG&E had implemented the second of its four preemptive blackouts.
There are indications the massive blaze, still burning in Northern California but now 65% contained, was ignited by a malfunction in a PG&E transmission line that was still energized.
Rescued:Animals caught in California's wildfires are evacuated and rescued
Michael Young, who leads the management of wildfire models in North America for the global firm Risk Management Solutions, said he sympathizes with the difficult choices utility companies are facing, and the reality that in some ways they’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
Young cited research that showed 84% of wildfires are caused by human activity. It’s not clear what percentage of that figure can be attributed to energy-company equipment, but data provided by Cal Fire shows fires started by power lines spiked from a five-year average of 296 to 408 in 2017, the highest increase in any category of fire causes.
“We do know vegetation hitting power lines and causing breaks does cause sparks,’’ Young said. “And if you can’t fix all the lines and protect them all from high winds, then you have to do something like shut the power out, right? Do I think it’s the right long-term strategy? Obviously not. You’ve got to get those power lines buried. You have to eliminate that risk.’’
Industry analysts say the risk has increased because of the combination of climate change – higher temperatures and lower humidity – with more houses being built in fire-prone areas and a since-discarded forest-management approach that did not allow for natural burns to clear away underbrush.
The price isn't right: Undergrounding could cost as much as $3M per mile
Undergrounding distribution lines would be very expensive, as much as $3 million per mile according to PG&E’s calculations, compared to $800,000 per mile overhead. That extra cost would obviously by passed along to customers.
Young, who has led studies of insurance-mitigation programs in Florida, pointed out several communities in areas vulnerable to hurricanes opted to invest in undergrounding power lines to better withstand such storms.
“This is not really new technology,’’ Young said. “It’s not an unsolvable problem.’’
Perhaps, but it requires a solvent company, and PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in January as it faced billions of dollars in liability from more than a dozen deadly wildfires linked to its equipment in the last two years.
And it would help to have a measure of public goodwill, which PG&E sorely lacks. The utility was found responsible for the 2010 gas-line explosion that killed eight people and destroyed 38 homes in the San Francisco suburb of San Bruno, then drew further scrutiny for its role in the wildfires of recent years, including the blaze that killed 85 people and essentially wiped out the town of Paradise in 2018.
And now, this year’s preemptive blackouts, which at times have affected close to 3 million people in northern and central California, prompting calls for the company to be disbanded. Cities likes San Francisco and San Jose have proposed either buying its grid or turning the utility into a customer-owned cooperative.
PG&E stands by viability of shutoffs despite Gov. Gavin Newsom's criticism
Gov. Gavin Newsom is openly courting buyers.
“I want as many people bidding for the assets of Pacific Gas & Electric as possible,’’ Newsom said Sunday before the third shutoff morphed into a fourth. “We continue to look for bidders large and small all across this country.’’
Giving in to persistent pressure from Newsom, PG&E on Tuesday agreed to issue credits of $100 and $250, respectively, to residential and business customers affected by the first preventive outage, which went into effect with little notice. Customers seeking information were further aggravated when the company’s website kept crashing.
At a news conference Thursday, PG&E President and CEO Bill Johnson again defended the need for shutoffs.
“We’ve shown here damage of over 300 instances of things that could have caused fires, major fires,’’ Johnson said while displaying photos after a major wind event. “Trees in lines, lines down, debris in lines, all of which can cause catastrophic wildfire. … So, I think what we’ve done is we have mitigated and avoided numerous things that could have been catastrophic wildfires.”
USC professor: PG&E is experimenting with 'new phenomenon' of shutoffs
PG&E began the shutoff program in October 2018, but it wasn’t fully implemented until this fall. That’s six years after San Diego Gas & Electric first deployed the strategy, but on a smaller scale, evoking less of an uproar. SD&E also spent more than $1 billion in fire prevention in the last dozen years, reducing risk.
Adam Rose, a professor at the University of Southern California who directs a risk-analysis center that studies natural disasters, said Southern California Edison also has been less aggressive in its shutoffs than PG&E.
On Thursday morning, the southland energy provider had cut off service to about 83,000 customers as the area experienced strong Santa Ana winds. Another 200,000-plus homes and businesses were under shutoff alert.
Rose said PG&E's reasoning for the outages is sound, especially given the liability it’s exposed to, but its approach needs to be fine-tuned considerably.
“Ideally they would do it very selectively, in a way where you really knew when there’s a strong threat and you could pinpoint exactly where so you could reduce the number of people who were disadvantaged by a shutdown,’’ Rose said. “Unfortunately, shutting down power lines is somewhat of a new phenomenon and they don’t have all the necessary information or models they need to do this in an optimal way.’’
Contributing: Kristin Lam, USA TODAY; Gabrielle Paluch, Palm Springs Desert Sun