He also blamed PG&E for its “deep-rooted obsession for keeping power flowing,” which he said could be blamed for allowing its equipment to ignite wildfires despite forecasts for hazardous weather and, starting in 2019, a power shutoff strategy.
This is from Julie Johnson, “Judge fires parting shots at PG&E as the utility’s probation comes to end,” San Francisco Chronicle, January 19, 2022.
“He” in the above is U.S. District Judge William Alsup, pictured above. PG&E is Pacific Gas and Electric, which provides much of the natural gas and electricity between central California, where I live, and northern California.
Alsup’s upset is about PG&E being obsessed with providing something that it has promised to provide its customers, something that we customers really value.
I get that Alsup is upset that PG&E hasn’t cleared brush and trees as much as he would like. I don’t know if he knows that with all the state and local regulations, that’s often easier said than done. Years ago, when a branch on our tree was rubbing against our power line, I called PG&E and asked them to come out. The guy was very nice and cut a couple of small branches, telling me all the while that he might be breaking the law, and encouraging me to pay a couple of hundred dollars to the Pacific Grove city government for permission to cut the branches further myself.
That was about 15 years ago. Maybe the regulations have been loosened since then, but I doubt it.
Beyond that issue, though, I found Alsup’s comment stunning. I don’t know about him. Maybe he has solar panels that provide enough electricity for all his house uses. I don’t. And solar is not a sure thing.
So I appreciate PG&E’s obsession “for keeping power flowing” just as I appreciate my local Safeway’s and Lucky’s obsession with stocking their shelves.
READER COMMENTS
BC
Jan 23 2022 at 7:33pm
I am confused about the last part of the judge’s quote: “…starting in 2019, a power shutoff strategy.” Is he blaming the power company’s obsession for keeping power flowing for also *not* keeping power flowing starting in 2019?
john hare
Jan 24 2022 at 4:17am
My obsession with pouring concrete is closely related to my obsession with eating regular and sleeping indoors. On a larger scale, the power company would likely be averse to going bankrupt.
Alan Goldhammer
Jan 24 2022 at 7:36am
Much of utility regulation is local and can be confusing. Some years ago, we suffered frequent power outages in our Bethesda home from tree branches falling on power lines. It did not take a major windstorm for this to happen as many trees were quite old and the canopy had never been adequately thinned. The public service commission that regulates the utility (PEPCO) told them in no uncertain terms that if they could not deal with this problem, no rate increase would be approved. PEPCO took this to heart and began an aggressive tree pruning program. While this outraged some of the tree huggers in the neighborhood, we no longer suffered from these periodic power outages and the inconvenience they caused. PEPCO received the promised rate increase.
Bottom line: sometimes economic incentives really do work in favor of the consumer.
William Shughart
Jan 24 2022 at 8:32am
My experience with a monopoly power company in Mississippi was that branches would be cut only if they were touching a line. An inch above and it was my problem to deal with and pay for. It is my understanding that at least some California wildfires have been exacerbated by PG&E’s refusal to clear brush and tree limbs around power lines.
Public sector entities would rather build new stuff (thus padding their rate bases) than maintain existing stuff.
Roger McKinney
Jan 24 2022 at 10:13am
Homeowners in OK are the problem. They don’t want trees trimmed. If a lineman tries, they shoot at him, vandalize his truck and/or sick their dogs on him. Then when a storm downs trees and causes power outages they curse the power company. Also, having worked for a utility I know that right of way maintenace is a huge expensive and neglected in bad rimes.
Benji
Jan 24 2022 at 10:21am
On a related note, I recommend this Propublica piece. California Air Resources Board (CARB) has been blocking controlled burns because they’re manmade events releasing CO2, even though they’re the only way to prevent megafires, preventable but not manmade events releasing massively more CO2.
The link between bad regulation and the wildfires is not hard to trace. (And I say that as someone who thinks PM2.5 has massive enough negative externalities for public health to justify regulation.)
Benji
Jan 24 2022 at 10:23am
Here’s the link. (My formatting got a bit messed up in that post) https://www.econlib.org/should-companies-be-deeply-obsessed-with-helping-customers/#comment-289775
David Henderson
Jan 24 2022 at 7:09pm
Thanks, Benji. I found that the link in your earlier comment worked and the one below didn’t. Good article.
AngryKrugman
Jan 24 2022 at 10:31am
Here is a link to the full opinion for context
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/show_temp.pdf
Vivian Darkbloom
Jan 24 2022 at 3:26pm
Thanks for the link—something that the original story should have included. Of course, the full text of the opinion provides useful context regarding the quoted “deep rooted obsession for keeping power flowing”. As I interpret it, the judge was objecting to what was, in his view, PG&E’s failure to do a risk/ benefit analysis to adequately balance the danger of fires with keeping those lines posing the greatest threat open. PG&E’s customers are likely concerned about both: they want their electricity to flow, but they also don’t want their houses to burn down as a result.
I don’t like it when journalists fail to link to the source document so that readers can check their work and read the selective quotes in context. I think the failure has to do with a self-interested desire to preserve their role as gatekeepers rather than serving as a gateway. In failing to providing ready access to the original source, the San Francisco Chronicle was’nt serving its customers very well.
Vivian Darkbloom
Jan 24 2022 at 3:28pm
“in failing to provide…wasn’t…”
Thomas Lee Hutcheson
Jan 25 2022 at 1:00pm
PG&E should face incentives such that it maximizes profits by producing value for its customers and avoiding the destruction of value when it’s power lines start fires. If the incentives are misaligned, the maximization of profits will not be socially optimal. Perhaps if the incentives (insurance rates, and threat of lawsuits) were better aligned, PG&E whole have invested more resources in fighting the regulations that make it difficult to avoid starting fires.
Comments are closed.