Pacific Gas & Electric ready to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection

[bcla]

https://abc7news.com/business/pg-e-to-file-for-chapter-11-bankruptcy-ceo-resigns/5073774/

They've been hit with numerous liability claims over the years including the San Bruno pipeline explosion in 2010 and the power line sparking starting several fires in the past few years. Apparently over 1000 fires have started in recent years. Most were relatively small, but there were huge ones such as 2017's Sonoma/Napa fires and the Camp Fire in Butte County.

I never heard of this before, but they do claim that they've found several of their utility poles shot up. It may just be they're trying to reduce liability, but certainly that could be a factor if they collapsed as a result of being damaged by gunfire.

 

[sasywtch]

I was listening to a local radio program. A resident who had just returned to Paradise said they were putting up the power poles. She asked them why they weren't going underground and a supervisor told her the cost was too high. She said, well, the cost of burning down a town must be higher. She couldn't believe they weren't putting the lines underground.

 

[cabanafrau]

I was listening to a local radio program. A resident who had just returned to Paradise said they were putting up the power poles. She asked them why they weren't going underground and a supervisor told her the cost was too high. She said, well, the cost of burning down a town must be higher. She couldn't believe they weren't putting the lines underground.

It's time for complete rebuild in that area and they're not making the shift to underground? Local officials should be raising a ruckus, now is the time.

 

[bcla]

It's time for complete rebuild in that area and they're not making the shift to underground? Local officials should be raising a ruckus, now is the time.

Might also be about the time it would take to get everything up and running. Still - underground utilities cost 3-4 to times as much and are a huge pain when they need to be worked on. Of course they already do that for gas, but I believe they would need to keep electric lines separate. And if it's not sealed correctly against the elements, they can flood when it rains. I lived in a city that had municipal electricity in buried lines. I remember we had a few outages during heavy rains that took a while to fix.

PG&E has put out a lot of local ads showing how involved their employees are in the local communities. Of course it's been purely PR trying to humanize the company given all the bad publicity they've gotten in the past decade, and especially since they likely put off maintenance and upgrading of power infrastructure in order to boost shareholder value. Sort of reminds me of the "People Do" ads that Chevron had touting their environmental credentials.

 

[kdonnel]

It's time for complete rebuild in that area and they're not making the shift to underground? Local officials should be raising a ruckus, now is the time.

The shift to underground would not be free and any cost will just be passed onto PG&E customers.

PG&E has already asked for the first of what will be many rate hikes to cover the recent wildfires.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pg-e-electric-rates-utility-asked-to-hike-bills-over-california-fires/

 

[cabanafrau]

The shift to underground would not be free and any cost will just be passed onto PG&E customers.

PG&E has already asked for the first of what will be many rate hikes to cover the recent wildfires.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pg-e-electric-rates-utility-asked-to-hike-bills-over-california-fires/

Restringing overhead isn't free either -- and brings risk of more wildfires in the same areas, wildfires which are incredibly costly to everyone, including loss of life.

Underground electrical absolutely isn't the best option everywhere. But since they have to rebuild this area anyway, an area which would probably benefit greatly from underground lines now is the logical time.

If a regulatory commission rubberstamps many rate hikes that include coverage for what can be shown to be negligent corporate decisions they might apply some pressure to deny executive compensation increases so that those responsible for overseeing their transmission equipment aren't allowed to be rewarded while their customers pay the tab.

 

[superme80]

I have no polite words for that company. I feel for the employees, but the heads?

 

[neverlandsky]

Underground lines still have to have the big overhead lines & stations to support the underground.

Although PG & E isn’t great they aren’t entirely to blame for the out of control wildfires. There was also a huge lack of forestry maintenance going on for years and years, poor infrastructure planning, and no warning to residents. Then the act of God with the winds. It was practically the perfect storm.

 

[kdonnel]

If a regulatory commission rubberstamps many rate hikes that include coverage for what can be shown to be negligent corporate decisions they might apply some pressure to deny executive compensation increases so that those responsible for overseeing their transmission equipment aren't allowed to be rewarded while their customers pay the tab.

https://www.desertsun.com/story/opi...tuents-desert-sun-editorial-board/2529551002/

Picture this: As the deadly Camp Fire was ravaging Butte County and leveling the town of Paradise, some California legislators were meeting in Hawaii with officials from various industries, including utility company executives who hope Sacramento shields them from billions in potential liability from increasingly costly wildfires.

I think the rubber stamp is out and at the ready, accepting campaign contributions to ensure an outcome both the legislators/regulators and PG&E are happy with.

 

[bcla]

Restringing overhead isn't free either -- and brings risk of more wildfires in the same areas, wildfires which are incredibly costly to everyone, including loss of life.

Underground electrical absolutely isn't the best option everywhere. But since they have to rebuild this area anyway, an area which would probably benefit greatly from underground lines now is the logical time.

I don't believe that the fire started in a residential area. It was going through a national forest. They've got a lot of transmission lines going through national forests. PG&E runs lines going to Yosemite National Park next to CA 140 through Sierra National Forest. PG&E even manages a few campgrounds.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/sierra/recarea/?recid=64891

PG&E is actually fairly receptive when it comes to reports of issues with power lines. I mentioned the trees catching fire in my neighborhood. It was likely caused by paint rags spontaneously catching fire while drying, but at first in the neighborhood we were thinking that it could have been from sparking power lines. They came almost immediately to check the lines and to rule out those as the source of the fire. But it's the cost of monitoring thousands of miles of power lines that go through remote areas is another matter.

I mentioned that they claim that they bullet holes all over several poles. I'm not sure if that can really be used to reduce their liability, since I'd be surprised if it weren't cumulative and should have been found with any regular inspection. If it was ignored that would really hurt their case.

 

[arminnie]

I haven't lived in California (Bay Area) since I retired about 15 years ago. I can't imagine what utility bills are there now. I paid a lot 15 years for my small condo where I had no A/C. I also used very little heat when I was going through "the change" and was hot all the time.

My house in Arkansas is twice the size. It gets HOT HOT HOT in the summer and very cold in the winter. Even 15 years later my utility bills in Arkansas are a fraction of my California bills. We also have a condo in New Orleans where A/C is used pretty much year round to some extent. My bills are very low.

All I could think of about this is that PG&E will up the rates to even more outrageous levels and the consumer will pay through the nose.

 

[mnrose]

In mountainous areas, underground lines can not only be expensive, but IMPOSSIBLE. Have you been to the Sierra foothills? It's rocky (boulders really) and tree covered. I don't fault PG&E for doing it above ground. I DO fault them for poor maintenance of their facilities. This is a KNOWN issue, and their maintenance (despite huge profits in the 80's and 90's, with many highly paid executives) is pathetic.

Of course, it is exacerbated by the changes in California due to climate change (not debating WHY it's happening, but it is indeed happening). This means providing electricity is going to be more expensive, as these costs are factored into rates. California already has ridiculous rates for electricity, and it's not going to get better. If I was ever to move back there (still own a home there), solar panels would be going on my house in about 2 days. It's the only way to make electricity somewhat affordable in that area. And, maybe that's a good thing?

ETA: I probably know more than I should about this. My job for some time was to lobby the California Public Utility Commission on matters related to a different industry than electric utilities, but I was at every single CPUC meeting for years. I know how they operated. I know how PG&E was treated.

 

[bcla]

In mountainous areas, underground lines can not only be expensive, but IMPOSSIBLE. Have you been to the Sierra foothills? It's rocky (boulders really) and tree covered. I don't fault PG&E for doing it above ground. I DO fault them for poor maintenance of their facilities. This is a KNOWN issue, and their maintenance (despite huge profits in the 80's and 90's, with many highly paid executives) is pathetic.

Of course, it is exacerbated by the changes in California due to climate change (not debating WHY it's happening, but it is indeed happening). This means providing electricity is going to be more expensive, as these costs are factored into rates. California already has ridiculous rates for electricity, and it's not going to get better. If I was ever to move back there (still own a home there), solar panels would be going on my house in about 2 days. It's the only way to make electricity somewhat affordable in that area. And, maybe that's a good thing?

ETA: I probably know more than I should about this. My job for some time was to lobby the California Public Utility Commission on matters related to a different industry than electric utilities, but I was at every single CPUC meeting for years. I know how they operated. I know how PG&E was treated.

I've mentioned that I used to live in Santa Clara, and still own a home there. The city has its own municipal utilities that handles almost everything - electricity, garbage/recycling, and water. The water is pretty bad though since most of it comes from city owned wells within the city limits. The most visible is in the middle of the Santa Clara Caltrain station parking lot. That water may be considered safe to drink, but it's horrible.

But now that my rant is over, the electricity bills were ridiculously low compared to PG&E. PG&E baseline rates were more than Santa Clara's maximum rate. I think PG&E's maximum residential rate was double or even triple. The only bill I got from PG&E was for gas, since I suppose the city didn't want to take it over. I remember PG&E heavily lobbied for Proposition 16 in 2010. It was supposed to set a 2/3 requirement of a local vote for a local government to set up its own municipal utilities, which would likely shut out PG&E from those markets. PG&E apparently funded nearly all of the contributions. I don't think Southern California Edison contributed a cent to it. However, the head of the CPUC didn't like it because it would apparently lessen the possibility that they could compare competitive pricing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_California_Proposition_16

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/General.aspx?id=4547
Shareholders of electric utilities are entitled to a fair return on their invested capital. The Public Utilities Commission’s responsibility is to set electricity rates just high enough to cover the cost of providing electricity service, plus a reasonable profit. For the Commission to do its job most effectively we need yardsticks to measure the utilities’ performance. Proposition 16 would make our job much harder by eliminating any possible “comparables”. California’s diverse and dynamic publicly owned utilities are not just competitors; they also provide working examples of alternative approaches to meeting customer energy needs. Proposition 16 would remove this incentive for electric utilities to be creative and innovative.

Finally, there is something fundamentally wrong with the idea that one company, spending $35 million can, by majority vote of the electorate, seek and obtain a two-thirds vote protection in our State Constitution. The purpose of the Constitution is to protect our sacred rights as citizens. It is not to protect the narrow private interests of a particular utility company.​

 

[Adelle Dazeem]

I've mentioned that I used to live in Santa Clara, and still own a home there. The city has its own municipal utilities that handles almost everything - electricity, garbage/recycling, and water. The water is pretty bad though since most of it comes from city owned wells within the city limits. The most visible is in the middle of the Santa Clara Caltrain station parking lot. That water may be considered safe to drink, but it's horrible.

But now that my rant is over, the electricity bills were ridiculously low compared to PG&E. PG&E baseline rates were more than Santa Clara's maximum rate. I think PG&E's maximum residential rate was double or even triple. The only bill I got from PG&E was for gas, since I suppose the city didn't want to take it over. I remember PG&E heavily lobbied for Proposition 16 in 2010. It was supposed to set a 2/3 requirement of a local vote for a local government to set up its own municipal utilities, which would likely shut out PG&E from those markets. PG&E apparently funded nearly all of the contributions. I don't think Southern California Edison contributed a cent to it. However, the head of the CPUC didn't like it because it would apparently lessen the possibility that they could compare competitive pricing.

I currently live in Santa Clara and I am so happy we bought here due to the low energy prices. Both DH and I have Teslas that require charging and it's so much cheaper than our friends that have PG&E. DH works in Santa Clara and his offers free charging so that helps even more. My only issue with the water was when we first moved here about 15 years ago - it's very hard. We installed a water softner and it's much better...but not great.

 

[bcla]

I currently live in Santa Clara and I am so happy we bought here due to the low energy prices. Both DH and I have Teslas that require charging and it's so much cheaper than our friends that have PG&E. DH works in Santa Clara and his offers free charging so that helps even more. My only issue with the water was when we first moved here about 15 years ago - it's very hard. We installed a water softner and it's much better...but not great.

Depends on which part of the city you're in. Different parts of the city are connected to the Hetch Hetchy system, some are blended with Hetch Hetchy water and well water, while some areas are only well water. Mine is in the yellow area. Great America, Intel, the big hotels and a bunch of the tech companies are in the light blue area.

 

[tvguy]

In mountainous areas, underground lines can not only be expensive, but IMPOSSIBLE. Have you been to the Sierra foothills? It's rocky (boulders really) and tree covered. I don't fault PG&E for doing it above ground. I DO fault them for poor maintenance of their facilities. This is a KNOWN issue, and their maintenance (despite huge profits in the 80's and 90's, with many highly paid executives) is pathetic.

That is the core issue. Underground is impossible in much of the fire area. P-G&E may have been almost entirely responsible for the fires....and that has not been determined yet....but IMHO there is some cost society or their customers have to bear in exchange for having electricity, natural gas, water and sewer service.

 

[bcla]

That is the core issue. Underground is impossible in much of the fire area. P-G&E may have been almost entirely responsible for the fires....and that has not been determined yet....but IMHO there is some cost society or their customers have to bear in exchange for having electricity, natural gas, water and sewer service.

I understand that typically all they have for transmission lines is an easement for the poles and the rights to string cables. Still - I know of some property near me that PG&E owns which hosts a base for one of their transmission line towers. They've allowed use of that land for a local holiday display.

I'm not even sure they could even negotiate for the rights to bury transmission lines in a national forest, such as the area where the Camp Fire started. I understand that transmission lines are far more complicated than residential/business utilities, where it might cost up to 8 times as much as overhead. And the terrain is filled with roots and rocks. In some parts of the the Sierra Nevada it's almost a miracle that there's enough dirt for a tree to grow.

 

[Adelle Dazeem]

Depends on which part of the city you're in. Different parts of the city are connected to the Hetch Hetchy system, some are blended with Hetch Hetchy water and well water, while some areas are only well water. Mine is in the yellow area. Great America, Intel, the big hotels and a bunch of the tech companies are in the light blue area.

The picture didn't post...

 

[bcla]

The picture didn't post...

It's a PDF. Whether or not it shows up as an inline image depends on your setup. Here's the direct link:

http://santaclaraca.gov/home/showdocument?id=8618

I found a JPEG, but it's not as detailed.

If that doesn't work (it's kind of technical) then maybe this attachment will.

 

[seashoreCM]

The state needs to rethink and re-plan fire prevention measures. What comes to my mind right now is deforested swaths of land as fire breaks. Coincidentally the swaths that high tension lines run through can be part of the fire break system since there must be side clearance from the lines. Also, freeways and major highways can be part of the fire break system.

Today, getting the necessary swath width is difficult because private land and lots come within X feet of the lines and the ideal width needed for a fire break is greater.