Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 291 posts

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#151

Post by dragonwriter »

FooHentai wrote: post #88
maxerickson wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there are areas that we can't afford to safely provide power to, we shouldn't provide power to those areas anymore. This is course a bummer given the past effort to provide power to those areas, but maybe it's okay to acknowledge mistakes.

>If there are areas that we can't afford to safely provide power to, we shouldn't provide power to those areas anymore. Isn't that exactly what just happened and exactly what everyone's complaining about?

No, what just happened is PG&E was forced to cut power because it has for years prioritized dividends over it's safety obligations, not because there are places to which power cannot be safely delivered.

This isn't a can't be done safely problem, it's a private firm gambling to squeeze out more short-term profits and hoping it doesn't blow up in their face problem.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#152

Post by simpsond »

kolbe wrote: post #43
simpsond wrote: post #28

Public utilities should not be for profit companies, especially public listed companies. They shouldn’t aim to maximize profits. If they were to instead maximize utility, they may re-invest in infrastructure more heavily and put power lines under ground. Maybe I am missing something and someone can offer a counter argument.

I think one glaring hole is that it’s very hard to incentivize people to maximize someone else’s utility. You don’t just say the words “maximize utility” and it just gets done.

This is a good point. What is utility here? I think the primary utility is highly available electricity. How is that maximized? I don't know how to do that tactically, so I should stop talking... but strategically it's about minimizing risk. I suppose that involves having a highly connected grid to many power sources (solar, wind, nuclear, hydroelectric, etc) to mitigate a SPOF. It should also involve low risk transmission (underground where possible, multipath, etc). This all comes at a great cost... but if profit is important (or required for the CEO to keep his job), not all money goes to improving the system, but to lining pockets of investors. So yeah, there needs to be a plan, but the current plan is keep things working and yield dividends to shareholders.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#153

Post by hadlock »

simpsond wrote: post #28

Public utilities should not be for profit companies, especially public listed companies. They shouldn’t aim to maximize profits. If they were to instead maximize utility, they may re-invest in infrastructure more heavily and put power lines under ground. Maybe I am missing something and someone can offer a counter argument.

By law PG&E can only make X from their utilities by state law, this regulation is audited and is pretty well documented.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#154

Post by dragonwriter »

zaroth wrote: post #127

Judge William Alsup (remember him?) who is overseeing the PG&E case in San Francisco said about shutoffs; “The prudent thing to do when you’re uncertain is to turn the power off,” he said. “When the public complains that everything in the refrigerator is bad and the ice cream melted, then you could blame the judge. I’m willing to take the heat.” [1] - https://www.kqed.org/news/11737336/judge-pge-paid-out-stock-...

> Judge William Alsup (remember him?) who is overseeing the PG&E case in San Francisco

The penalty & probation supervision for their felony convictions over the San Bruno fire, not the bankruptcy—both are PG&E cases in San Francisco.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#155

Post by coredog64 »

bsder wrote: post #102
heimatau wrote: post #84

What I strongly believe is being overlooked here is not the fact that their 'liability math' has changed but the fact that this is the result of regional utility monopolies. The entire energy sector are allowed to operate in these terrible ways because they have local governments supporting their terrible business models. Price of energy hasn't gone down because there is no actual competition. Without these large gov…

And yet when you try deregulating it, you wind up with Enron. In my opinion, electricity needs to now become a government function. The more people install solar panels and batteries, the less profitable electricity is going to be. It's a death spiral eventually completely dominated by the fixed costs of keeping the network connected and enough electricity production in reserve rather than the variable costs of basel…

The CA-Enron fiasco was not “deregulation”, it was “reregulation”. CA said that utilities could not purchase power on the futures market, but had to buy it on the spot market. Enron, by some strange coincidence, always had to take plants off line during peak hours, leading to high spot prices.

There’s nothing deregulated about forbidding futures contracts.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#156

Post by solotronics »

Is there not a technical solution to this? A side effect here will be people creating their own power systems. I have already had my power go off 4 times this year and now I am looking at solar panels, batteries, and a natural gas generator.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#157

Post by themodelplumber »

solotronics wrote: post #156

Is there not a technical solution to this? A side effect here will be people creating their own power systems. I have already had my power go off 4 times this year and now I am looking at solar panels, batteries, and a natural gas generator.

The same... I'm looking forward to some solar now. I just yesterday bought the Harbor Freight 100W solar panel set for starters, as it's on sale right now. I had purchased a generator for the PSPS but we were informed about 6h prior to event that we were in a small area that would be spared.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#158

Post by toomim »

solotronics wrote: post #156

Is there not a technical solution to this? A side effect here will be people creating their own power systems. I have already had my power go off 4 times this year and now I am looking at solar panels, batteries, and a natural gas generator.

I suspect that you're right -- that there is a technical solution -- and that PG&E isn't technically competent enough to find it. They couldn't even keep their website running!

Their business model has been mostly static for many years. In that time, the whole business can ossify, and only now -- when the environment has changed -- do they need to adapt. And they aren't prepared to do it.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#159

Post by jhayward »

dredmorbius wrote: post #68
tomohawk wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private companies electrified the US. This model was pioneered by Samuel Insull. https://www.masterresource.org/insull-samuel/insull-rural-el... FDR didn't like competition for attention, and hounded Insull in court for years.

Private companies electrified ... specific high-profit regions of the United States. They were profoundly indifferent to most rural regions, leading to the Rural Electrification Act (1936). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Electrification_Act Thomas Edison's first power plant, the Pearl Street Power Station (1882) powered just 82 customers initially, largely commercial and industrial users. Large-scale electrifica…

Texas was largely transformed by the Rural Electrification project of LBJ. Wouldn't have happened without the government.

Re: ‘This Did Not Go Well’: Inside PG&E’s Blackout Control Room

#160

Post by skybrian »

solotronics wrote: post #156

Is there not a technical solution to this? A side effect here will be people creating their own power systems. I have already had my power go off 4 times this year and now I am looking at solar panels, batteries, and a natural gas generator.

The solution is maintaining residential power lines well enough so they can't start fires. (But how much are people willing to pay for that?)

Or, yes, buying a generator. Looks like Home Depot has a good selection.

Post reply on HN