|
|
|
|
|
|
by mdorazio
2452 days ago
|
|
|
Exactly. Some kind of middle ground needs to be found here - either a limitation of liability at some level or some kind of agreed-upon thermal event monitoring shared between PG&E and local fire departments. Otherwise the only business-viable alternative is to keep turning off the power. Burying equipment/lines would probably cost enough to bankrupt them. Of course, the alternative for customers is to install a Powerwall or equivalent for these situations, so maybe this is good for Tesla/distributed grid proponents? |
|
|
What they should've been doing all along is maintaining their damn equipment - the reason we have regulated public monopolies is so that they can generate sufficient revenues to afford long-term capital investments that prevent things like this. There're a bunch of systemic failures here, some on the part of CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) and some on PG&E management. But given that we're here, blackouts are probably preferable to burning up half the state again.
It does make me want to just go off-grid with a Powerwall and solar panels. If we don't actually get reliable electricity out of the deal, exactly what are we paying the electricity company for? But that's challenging as a renter, and buying (and maintaining) a house in California is equally challenging.