This electrical transmission tower has a problem • Hacker News Board

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#281

Post by daniellarusso » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:23 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #210

joe_the_user wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"over-engineering" something can't make it last forever, can't prevent it from eventually wearing out. If that's the plan, it just postpones the day when people suffer. As you say, these things were engineered for the long haul but the people harmed in Santa Rosa fire that the collapse of a pylon caused probably aren't impressed by shear lifetime. Father: Son, some day, all of this will be yours. And since we don't e…

So what's the right answer then? If you build something to last 100 years, you leave little incentives for maintenance and all but guarantee a catastrophic failure a century from now. If you build something to last 10 weeks, you're creating a lot of waste - wasted labor, money, energy and natural resources, involved in producing and shipping replacement parts, as well as performing the maintenance job. You're also ma…

Are we talking about k8s?

I jest.

Regardless, it seems ‘waste’ is what is needed to drive the economy.

Wasted labor is still people employed, getting a paycheck, and participating in the economy.

I don’t know if we want to eliminate waste without UBI or some other social safety net.

If we were to eliminate waste, less people would have jobs.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#282

Post by klmadfejno » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:23 PM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #155

43920 wrote: post #60

This is definitely a failure on PG&E's part, but I'm still not sure how much sense it makes to assign them blame for this fire. The environment they're operating in is somewhat ridiculous - the forest is so dry and overgrown that pretty much any flame source will start a fire large enough to burn a huge area; this specific tower failure is basically just the thing that revealed a much larger issue. With proper engine…

> With proper engineering and maintenance, PG&E could probably reduce the frequency of fires significantly, but there's always going to be a non-zero risk of fire, both from power lines and other sources, and it seems basically inevitable that one of them would have started another fire at some point. I don’t understand. You’re conceding that if PG&E were a competent and responsible company they could significantly r…

Suppose the government left barrels of leaky oil around, then you cause a small fire, which escalates into a huge fire as a result. It's fair to say that you caused the fire. It's probably also fair to say that the bulk of damages are due to government negligence. The debate is where we fall on that spectrum. I would think the power company should be punished as if it caused fires on an average managed forest but there's going to be nuance.

Point is there's two parties with some degree of negligence.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#283

Post by joppy » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:24 PM UTC

43920 wrote: post #60

This is definitely a failure on PG&E's part, but I'm still not sure how much sense it makes to assign them blame for this fire. The environment they're operating in is somewhat ridiculous - the forest is so dry and overgrown that pretty much any flame source will start a fire large enough to burn a huge area; this specific tower failure is basically just the thing that revealed a much larger issue. With proper engine…

Surely seeing an organisation being so careless in its maintenance of an extremely dangerous asset is criminal, regardless of whether or not a fire was started. “I own giant death cables in the sky but skimp on their upkeep costs” is already worth punishing or holding someone accountable for.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#284

Post by Dahoon » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:28 PM UTC

I'm amazed how a nation as rich as the US allows things to fall apart as much as it does but maybe one of the reasons it is so rich is because of the lack of money used on fixing things? Last time it was dangerous bridges called out. What's next?

If only state run wasn't even worse in the US it could be a better way. It baffles the mind that electricity, gas, internet, etc. is being run on a for-profit basis. Clearly these are all in the nations interest to have top-notch.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#285

Post by jagged-chisel » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:28 PM UTC

machello13 wrote: post #271

resonantjacket5 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No the root of the problem is that there's too much forest that hasn't burned. Blaming PG&E is missing the actual problem. For instance the Beirut explosion was the fault from the welders causing the explosion. Yes, but the larger and more important issue is why are there so many explosives in the first place? California's mismanagement with it's forest is the same issue. These forests should be periodically burned t…

It's possible for more than one cause to contribute to an event. California needs to manage its forests better, but PG&E is also clearly at fault.

That dockside warehouse needs to handle its explosives better, but the welder is clearly at fault.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#286

Post by biztos » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:28 PM UTC

machello13 wrote: post #271

resonantjacket5 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No the root of the problem is that there's too much forest that hasn't burned. Blaming PG&E is missing the actual problem. For instance the Beirut explosion was the fault from the welders causing the explosion. Yes, but the larger and more important issue is why are there so many explosives in the first place? California's mismanagement with it's forest is the same issue. These forests should be periodically burned t…

It's possible for more than one cause to contribute to an event. California needs to manage its forests better, but PG&E is also clearly at fault.

Does California need to do this, or the Federal government?

Where I'm from in NorCal it's all National Forest except for the parts that are private land.

A quick search indicates that some 58% of California forest is managed by the Feds and about 3% by the state.

So -- in addition to PG&E being at fault, shouldn't we be talking about Washington more than Sacramento here?

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#287

Post by 10000truths » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:28 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #260

Zanni wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An even better analogy is Jenga. California's uncontrolled fuel load was going to result in massive fires at some point. Yes, PG&E could have reduced the chance of it being them, which would be great for PG&E, but would make no difference to California.

The fuel load decays over time, so a long enough wait period and the next fire is independent of the last fire. Thus, fewer PG&E fires just means less fires rather than there being some independent amount of fire that’s always going to happen. If anything they need to have more responsibility in such areas not less responsibility. If they can’t detect a tree is at risk or not then either cut down more trees or use un…

Well clearly, the fuel load accumulates faster than it decays, or else the fires would not have reached this scale in the first place.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#288

Post by rubidium » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:29 PM UTC

rcpt wrote: post #80

williadc wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm of the opinion that humans should not be living in areas that burn regularly. Along similar lines of thinking, humans should not be living in areas that flood regularly, or that have earthquakes regularly, or that have hurricanes regularly, or that have tornadoes regularly, or that have insufficient water, or that have excessive heat or cold regularly, or that have high rates of animal-transmitted disease. This…

It actually leaves quite a lot of places to live. Yes an asteroid could hit anywhere but the notion that suburban sprawl out into every corner of the wilderness is justified by that is ludicrous.

It would be a really fun map though, to determine where is "safest" based on an individuals risk profile.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#289

Post by ClumsyPilot » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:30 PM UTC

vladvasiliu wrote: post #173

csours wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're all thinking about C-hooks because that's what failed here. What if the foundation had failed? Or any one of a million other things. I'm not saying that PG&E are clear by any means, just that it's really easy to point fingers after an incident. Be very wary of hindsight bias. So very much of America's infrastructure is aging and used past planned capacity. How can you tell ahead of time which infrastructure wil…

> We're all thinking about C-hooks because that's what failed here. What if the foundation had failed? Or any one of a million other things. I'm not saying that PG&E are clear by any means, just that it's really easy to point fingers after an incident. Be very wary of hindsight bias. I'm not sure that's the point. C-hooks are an example of a preventable accident. The problem isn't the c-hook itself but the policy / c…

> "the solution is not to go around and check every single c-hook"

The solution is precisely to check every single one at least a few times a century. This is not that much to ask.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#290

Post by biztos » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:31 PM UTC

resonantjacket5 wrote: post #217

tshaddox wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With proper engineering and maintenance, PG&E could probably reduce the frequency of fires significantly, but there's always going to be a non-zero risk of fire, both from power lines and other sources, and it seems basically inevitable that one of them would have started another fire at some point. I don’t understand. You’re conceding that if PG&E were a competent and responsible company they could significantly r…

No the root of the problem is that there's too much forest that hasn't burned. Blaming PG&E is missing the actual problem. For instance the Beirut explosion was the fault from the welders causing the explosion. Yes, but the larger and more important issue is why are there so many explosives in the first place? California's mismanagement with it's forest is the same issue. These forests should be periodically burned t…

> California's mismanagement with its forest is the same issue.

I agree that the forests should be managed differently, but if this being "California's mismanagement" is an actual thing as opposed to political disinformation, I'd love to see a couple links to back it up.

Some quick googling suggests that it's mostly a Federal problem, which has very different implications especially right now. Am I wrong?