Pin It

Shutoffs aren't the answer 

Power utilities' new policy to prevent fires will cause more problems than it will solve

The devastation of climate-change-induced wildfires is real and will continue to get worse as we see new fires eclipse previous fires in size, destruction, and deaths. Shutting off the power will prevent some of these fires, but are the impacts acceptable?

California is embarking on a statewide experiment that we have not fully planned for. All the major utilities in California now have a Public Safety Power Shutdown (PSPS) plan that will give the public at best 48 hours notice that their power will be shut off for multiple days. These shutdowns will affect not only people who live in wildland areas, but also people who live on a circuit that traverses a wildland area.

There is unequivocal agreement that California must reduce the number of destructive and deadly fires occurring in a climate changing world. But is the cure worse than the disease? Most of the public is oblivious to what is at stake, and there is not consistency in what local governments will do to keep their communities safe from the multitude of impacts that will likely occur.

California public resources code establishes many requirements for utilities to follow to prevent power-line-caused fires. Even if the utility is following all of the rules, the utility is responsible for wildfire damage caused by their equipment. It is a doctrine known as "inverse condemnation." Only California and Alabama have this use of inverse condemnation. Several of the recent deadly fires in California were caused from power lines under this doctrine.

PSPS-activated outages, authorized under the California Public Utility Commission, will occur during days identified as extreme fire days—when the vegetation is dry, the winds are blowing, and the temperatures are high. Days we usually associate with Red Flag Warnings may now be days we associate as days without power.

PSPS impacts are significant. Most affected will be people who are dependent on electricity for medical devices such as oxygenator machines, dialysis, and electric wheelchairs. The elderly and others will have no electricity to run needed air conditioning and fans on days of record-breaking heat.

Almost all gas stations in communities affected will have no power. Street signals, restaurant refrigeration, elevators, and school classrooms will all be without power.

Even firefighters who are responding to fires will not have adequate water that relies on electric pumps to fill tanks and pressurize hydrants. Farmers and ranchers may not have water for crops and livestock.

Buying individual generators to provide power during a PSPS is not a viable solution. Generators can be expensive, a cost many people cannot afford. They require special wiring that if not done right may backfeed power into the grid where it too could cause a fire. In addition, they produce excessive carbon and pollutants, neither of which we need more of.

We are reliant on cellphones to both alert the community during disasters and for people to get news updates and locate and meet our loved ones. Cellphones will need to be recharged. Many cell towers do not have redundant systems to continue to operate without power, potentially leaving areas of a community in a communication blackout. Even cable TV and house phones could be affected.

California, the fifth largest economy in the world, has little tolerance for the impacts of multi-day power outage caused by accidents and disasters let alone ones that are caused by the utilities simply turning off the power on critical fire days. The rolling blackouts in the year 2000-01 caused such a crisis and eventually contributed to Gov. Gray Davis being recalled.

The utilities have already done a lot to try to reduce power-line-caused fires. They have hired fire meteorologists and added hundreds of weather stations to ensure they have good data on the conditions that could trigger a power-line-caused fire. They have already hardened many power poles and hardware and cleared trees and vegetation around and below conductors.

They have surveyed their grid with aircraft and drones looking for maintenance issues. They have written wildfire mitigation plans approved by the California Public Utilities Commission.

Further, they are committed to doing more. No question, they are concerned and focused. They communicate that PSPS is a last resort in the prevention of utility-caused fires. That said, PSPS should not be a permanent solution.

The design and engineering of electrical equipment needs to be commensurate with the extreme conditions of the environment. Systems should be designed for the potential threat that could cause failure of that system's equipment. We don't evacuate buildings during high winds because the buildings are designed to withstand the winds. Such should be the same for the electrical equipment that makes up the electrical grid: Design it so it will not fail.

The utilities need to have a date certain when the need for PSPS is no longer necessary. When all the system is hardened to a point where wildland fires are no longer caused from faulty equipment, poorly maintained equipment, equipment not designed for the environment it is located in. So when will PSPS no longer be used, and do we even have the tolerance for its use now?

While the local governments have requested it, the utilities have not yet provided them with an accurate analysis of how many people could be affected when an area is de-energized.

When pressed on conducting model runs for communities to see what areas and impacts a PSPS would cause, the utilities seem unable. Local governments currently have no idea how significant a PSPS will be in their communities. Will it be 100 people or 100,000 people who will be in the dark?

The utilities have been asked what they will do to mitigate the impacts, and, in general, the simple answer from them is that it's the customers who must prepare, it's the government and businesses who must prepare.

Neither local governments nor businesses are fiscally ready for this. A restaurant, a school, a bank—none of them are prepared to be closed for multiple days. In an emergency, the government assumes that they will expend local, state, and federal funds to respond to and recover from that emergency. The impacts of a PSPS will essentially create a multiple-day emergency, yet there are no government funds to pay for the response to that emergency. This includes creating cooling shelters, phone charging stations, checking on people, securing darkened neighborhoods from crime, activating Emergency Operations Centers and a Call Center, and checking in on our vulnerable populations.

When the utilities were asked if they will pay for this response, the answer was simply avoided. They will not make that commitment.

Approximately 9 percent of all fires are caused by vehicles and 9 percent by power lines, yet we don't close highways when there are extreme fire condition days. We would simply not consider disrupting lives this way.

If utilities are liable for the damage caused from a wildfire under inverse condemnation, would they not also be responsible for the damage and harm caused from selectively turning off the power?

While we all agree the impacts of the ever-increasing destructive fires must be reversed and even eliminated, solving the problem through PSPS may not be the answer, especially as a long-term solution. The real solution to preventing a wildfire ignition from an electrical component is to have a resilient electrical grid designed to not fail. Δ

Robert Lewin is a retired director of the Santa Barbara County Office of Emergency Management. Send comments through the editor at, or submit a letter for publication to

Pin It


Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

Readers also liked…

Search, Find, Enjoy

Submit an event

Trending Now

© 2023 New Times San Luis Obispo
Powered by Foundation