This electrical transmission tower has a problem • Hacker News Board

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#381

Post by resonantjacket5 » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 3:46 PM UTC

awalton wrote: post #262

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…

> Yes, but the larger and more important issue is why are there so many explosives in the first place? Ah, so the problem is negligence. And what negligence was there? PG&E not maintaining their towers as clearly documented (or rather, not documented as the thread shows), or even possibly the federal government not maintaining Bureau of Land Management and USDA Forest lands? No - it's California's fault, spoken as if…

The problem has been built up for decades through both democratic and republican administrations.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#382

Post by yesdocs » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 3:50 PM UTC

edge17 wrote: post #374

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…

Seeing as there is a lot or harangue and no data being presented, here is some data https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42408-019-0041-0#... In general, the study contends that the fires are fuel-dominated (too much forest) and not wind-dominated fires. It also contends that the California drought climate has contributed significantly to the problem. > On the timber-rich interior US Forest Service (USFS) fores…

Under this approach, we would have to burn all of our natural forests down to the ground because of climate change. It will soon be too dry for any forest to be in it’s natural state. Plus I don’t see how this is strictly a California problem, federal funds are required to manage federal lands. Especially since the current federal administration is fueling the onset of climate change like no other. I’ve witnessed the billions spent by PG&E in trimming trees away from these poles, but they should have spent a little more and gone the distance to just bury these lines underground. PG&E is a failed experiment. They have shown when confronted with the challenge of what’s best for the public and what’s best for the shareholders, they always choose the latter

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#383

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 3:53 PM UTC

krallja wrote: post #308

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in Africa. The parks used to run controlled burns, every year or two, of the savanna grass. They tended to do this during the [very] wet season. But PG&E is still on the hook for taking better care of their infrastructure. It all comes down to dollars and [non]sense. Some actuary has determined that an occasional lawsuit and rotten press run is cheaper than maintaining the wires. Here in New York, many of the…

> There’s no plan to dig them up and replace them Yes, but that’s disingenuous. The largest civil engineering project in America right now is the new water tunnel for NYC. It’s been in progress for fifty years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Water_Tunnel_No....

Thanks for that. I’d completely forgotten about it. Hopefully, it wasn’t planned by the same folks that planned East Side Access. I have three friends that have retired, while working on it, and it’s many, many years behind schedule. Each of them had planned to be still working for the MTA, when it was done.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#384

Post by rayiner » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 3:55 PM UTC

unexaminedlife wrote: post #340

rayiner wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by “political disinformation?” Some news outlets you don’t like published the story? How much “moral clarity” does the outlet need to have before you’ll consider the article?

I don't understand how someone could have been alive, over the last 4 years, inside a real human body with a functioning human brain and not understand the sentiment of the post you're replying to.

The sentiment of the post is what confuses me. The idea that California wildfires are caused by forest mismanagement is being covered by many reputable news sources. The sibling posts contain four such links. Some of those sites may have ideological leanings such that they focus more on that mismanagement than climate change, but the other sources have ideological leanings so they focus more on climate change than forest mismanagement. Regardless, we’re not talking about some Russian Facebook bot here.

Hence my question: do you need the New York Times to say it before you’ll believe it’s not “political disinformation?”

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#385

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 3:55 PM UTC

daniellarusso wrote: post #281

TeMPOraL wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

... or more people would be available to take on work that's more needed and not currently being done. Otherwise, why have machines and technology, if they all primarily automate tasks your fellow laborers could be doing?

I think that work which exist only to provide jobs is a waste at societal level. But it's also a waste at company level - why would you make your product labor-intensive to maintain, where you could make it robust instead? In reality, the trick is to ensure you're not the one paying for maintenance - and then you save money by making more fragile products.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#386

Post by poleguy » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 4:03 PM UTC

Am I the only one? Why no other donations today? https://gf.me/u/yvd2fb

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#387

Post by Retric » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 4:11 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #357

Retric wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>When fires start in suburbs they rarely grow out of control, it’s when their far from human habitation 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?

Yes, yes, and yes. Your point?

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#388

Post by edge17 » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 4:13 PM UTC

yesdocs wrote: post #382

edge17 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seeing as there is a lot or harangue and no data being presented, here is some data https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42408-019-0041-0#... In general, the study contends that the fires are fuel-dominated (too much forest) and not wind-dominated fires. It also contends that the California drought climate has contributed significantly to the problem. > On the timber-rich interior US Forest Service (USFS) fores…

Under this approach, we would have to burn all of our natural forests down to the ground because of climate change. It will soon be too dry for any forest to be in it’s natural state. Plus I don’t see how this is strictly a California problem, federal funds are required to manage federal lands. Especially since the current federal administration is fueling the onset of climate change like no other. I’ve witnessed the…

That's not how natural dynamic systems work. There is a level of stability (some optimal level of forest) that the natural system wants to have, and it will naturally burn away excess if the people were not present. Much of the fires this year were caused by lightening (nature).

> Plus I don’t see how this is strictly a California problem

Indeed it is not just a California problem. Believe it or not, there are other places in the country that do more controlled burns and manage fires better. The US Southeast burns nearly 2x the acreage as California on an annual basis.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#389

Post by cmurf » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

edge17 wrote: post #374

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…

Seeing as there is a lot or harangue and no data being presented, here is some data https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42408-019-0041-0#... In general, the study contends that the fires are fuel-dominated (too much forest) and not wind-dominated fires. It also contends that the California drought climate has contributed significantly to the problem. > On the timber-rich interior US Forest Service (USFS) fores…

Forest management is in conflict with home ownership and building code in the forests, and it's sufficiently complicated that what's happening is the only way forward. What support is there to say private land ownership within forests: federal, state, and BLM land? If there were no private land ownership, there'd be no political resistance to controlled burns, there'd be no demand to put out fires immediately. The instant humans started to build in these areas, their rights directly lead to the changes in natural state of the forests.

There are similar problems with homes on beaches and in flood plains. Not only is private home ownership allowed, it's federally subsidized via the National Flood Insurance program.

Re: This electrical transmission tower has a problem

#390

Post by _ph_ » Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

DuskStar wrote: post #323

_ph_ wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That fires would happen for other reasons is completely inconsequential to me in this case. This tower was criminally neglected even in basic maintenance. Such a tower should not exist in any place, and if only the consequence would be long power outages without forwarning. Separately, everyone responsible for the failing tower to be able to light such a disastrous fire, should be prosecuted as well. PG&E certainly i…

And to me, the fact that the fires would happen for other reasons is the most important thing in the case . Blame should fall on the people with the power to prevent an accident from happening, and PG&E did not have that power. (They instead had the power to prevent the accident from happening in one specific way , but it still would have happened in another way)

I don't claim that blame for the fires rests on PG&E. My point was rather, that the towers were in an unacceptable state of maintenance. Any kind of accident or disaster could happen any time from towers in that state. And a disaster did happen. That others greatly contributed greatly or even mainly to the disaster taking its scale, is a question for the precise liability and punishment split.