Earlier quoted context omitted.
What an odd sentiment...
Why? There is such a thing as a multi domain fault. He never said this wasn't PG&E's fault, just that out of 100% they don't bear all the fault. I mean, California is in the middle of burning down from a lighting complex at this moment. Suing mother nature isn't going to do much good if you want to put the blame on her for that fire. As long as people live in the Wildland Urban Interface, and we live in a climate tha…
This electrical transmission tower has a problem
351–360 of 479 posts
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#352There's a comment in the thread suggesting something I'd never thought of before, but which sounds like a great idea, although I'm not too good with economic thinking: "Generation and transmission need to be separated. Generation can be a perfectly competitive market and is naturally suited to private business. Transmission is inherently a monopoly and should be publicly owned. Combining the two in one for-profit com…
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
#354This case of breaking metal on an open hook reminds me very much of a warning on a climbing carabiner: make sure it is clipped fully and the gate is shut, otherwise the nose might break off. I am sure someone checked the math etc, but an open hook with decreasing diameter towards the tip seems an odd design choice for a metal-on-metal arrangement that is being pulled hard by winds. That is not to say that any system…
Like a dripping gutter slowly wearing a groove into a block of stone below it.
Being a closed loop would now have changed the outcome here, at best it might have bought more time. But as this fault probably developed over a time period of almost a century, I doubt that more time would have changed the outcome.
> And this makes think if this could be designed so that inspection is easy and a replacement could be scheduled before the breaking point is reached.
Based on the photos, it looks like the groove cut into the hook was almost half the width of the hook at the point of failure. Either the hook simply wasn’t inspected, or the inspector simply didn’t care that solid lump of steel had a half inch slot cut into it. I would hope that something like that would be a clear enough indicator that the hook needed replacing.
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
My take on this is that PG&E way/is behaving negligently and the investigation that resulted from the fire uncovered that. They are literally the cause of the fire in the sense that their actions are what produced the initial flame. However, I don't think the fault should lie with them because something was going to start a fire and they just happened to be the unlucky bunch stuck holding the match. There is no way y…
This thread is going in circles. What people are saying is that PG&E should be expected to do what's required of them to maintain their equipment, and that failing to maintain their equipment was a cause of this specific fire. You're right, it's basically bad luck that their decades of negligence led to this disaster, but it still did lead to it. Whether or not there was a pre-existing condition that made fires more likely.
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
What an odd sentiment...
Why? There is such a thing as a multi domain fault. He never said this wasn't PG&E's fault, just that out of 100% they don't bear all the fault. I mean, California is in the middle of burning down from a lighting complex at this moment. Suing mother nature isn't going to do much good if you want to put the blame on her for that fire. As long as people live in the Wildland Urban Interface, and we live in a climate tha…
We’ve completely screwed up our planet.
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is mostly incorrect, and a really bad take at understanding fires in semi-arid climates. The fires we are having are a human caused problem, and by human I don't necessarily mean PG&E. Trying to put this blame on one company is going to accomplish pretty much nothing and just lead to more deaths in the future as we piss around looking for the wrong people to blame and avoid solutions. Also, underground cables st…
Amusingly, mostly incorrect in this case translates to true. The point is it’s not a linear increase with time. Yes, controlled burns can make a serious difference, their also a significant risk on their own as unlike wetter climates you get a lot of fuel at the same time. Blaming PG&E is relevant because they are one of the few companies operating in these areas. When fires start in suburbs they rarely grow out of c…
Do you know what 'Wildland Urban Interface' means?
Do you know where most of the houses burn?
Do you understand why this is the case?
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#358This 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…
No. He's saying that even if "PG&E were a competent and responsible company", the fire would still start, but through some other mechanism because it is a powder keg waiting to be set off by something. California wildfires are due to bad forest management policy spanning decades.
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#359Start with invasive shrubs like blackberries. They spread wildly and require a ton of work to maintain. (And before people say “use goats”, know they are not a magic bullet.) Limbing trees, where you remove branches under 10’, can help prevent “ladder fires”, but it’s time consuming or costly if you need to hire someone to do it.
Forests need to be thinned, invasive species kept at bay, and fuel in general needs to be removed or burned. And this stuff is alive so it’s a perennial thing to deal with. Even with grants, profit from timber, etc, it’s a lot of work, time, and money.
In retrospect it’s easy to point fingers at the National Forest Service and criticize their policy of putting fires out. Imagine for a second the opposition they’d face had they just let fires burn for the past half century. Even if it’s the “right” thing to do, it would be a very hard sell. People generally want to see action, and have a hard time seeing inaction as “doing something.”
Similarly with controlled burns. I’d love to burn our land every year the way that Native Americans used to — but it’s not without risk. There’s simply too much fuel.
Up in Oregon things have historically been very wet. Comically so. The result is a lot of lush vegetation. Which dries out in a drought and becomes fuel. As these unprecedented burns happen more and more frequently, they push forests into new phases of succession, where a new cycle of shrub-drought-fire becomes the norm. These firestorms are a different breed from the mild creeping forest fires that are part of a natural forest ecosystem.
All of that said, forest management is incredibly important. We need a new approach, and I’d argue we need more grants for the landowners who can’t afford to do the work necessary to prepare their land for this new climate. We also need to take a serious look at all of the development in the wildland-urban-interface and figure out how we’re going to address it. And yes, to the chagrin of many here, we need to address Climate Change.
But, all of that said, none of that IMHO absolves PG&E from gross negligence in failing to properly maintain equipment in areas of known heightened risk.
Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem
#360I've got a bit of a problem with articles like this one. I'll try and illustrate it with an analogy: Imagine some asshole puts an incendiary in an orphanage, and rigs it to go off when a nearby speed trap detects someone going more than 10mph over. Eventually, someone does, and the orphanage catches fire. Further, the group responsible for constructing and maintaining the orphanage hasn't looked at the place for 50 y…
I've seen this sentiment in other replies also. To me it implies that you're saying that fires are being started at near the maximal rate allowed by the forest conditions, so that increased sparks are ultimately meaningless. Is this the case?