3 ms·
> if they don't have sufficient backup power They have backup power which can get them through any expected power outage. They don't have unlimited backup powe
by droithomme 7y ago
> if they don't have sufficient backup power
They have backup power which can get them through any expected power outage. They don't have unlimited backup power that would be able to get them through a "apocalypse" or major terrorism scenario where the world is ending and power will be out for more than a week. Preparing to survive an apocalypse or major terrorism incident is possible. Build all facilities a mile underground with a self enclosed ecosystem. Might cost trillions, but can be done.
PG&E has intentionally deployed, at short and inadequate notice, what is equivalent to a terrorist attack on west coast infrastructure. No one prepared for or expected that scenario. Past events have shown that PG&E management are sociopaths who intentionally engaged in mass criminal negligence which resulted in dozens of deaths and billions of dollars of property damage. Even under the oversight of a captured court, they continue with their games.
If there is any sanity left in California, the USDOJ would bring the executives who deployed this plan and the judge who signed off on it under terrorism charges. If any deaths occur as a result of these antics, it should be capital charges.
- 24gttghh 7y agoYou almost lost me at the apocalypse metaphor but I catch your drift. Weeks at a time of no power aren't easy to be prepared for, but I feel like this event should be one more reason we need more distributed power generation in the US. Less single points of failure.
- droithomme 7y agoYeah sorry I didn't mean to suggest a religious apocalypse, but any civilization-ending event which apocalypse also means: whether cooling and global glaciation, warming and ocean inundation, all-out global nuclear exchange between superpowers, the eruption of the Yellowstone caldera, large meteor impact, "inevitable" Carrington event, 1 in 1000 year worldwide tsunami, etc. But it can be local too and without outside support is the same as world ending if you can't get out. If you have power loss for weeks in an area that is totally power dependent you start to see civilization meltdown. The situation in Puerto Rico recently was an example, another is the Haiti earthquake before that. Neither has recovered years later. You make a good point about distributed distribution. Would have to be very local to avoid this wildfire problem as PG&E is doing (shut off power instead of deal with actual issue). The wildfire problem is one that is decades in the making and coupled with poor open areas management by government policy in general and not just the power company, in particular not allowing periodic fires to burn out underbrush. I had this huge pile of brush in my backyard. When it burned it was very dangerous. Now I make sure to do more regular smaller burns as giant burns are not easily manageable. I like the solution of small Hitachi style safe nuclear reactors that service neighborhoods of around 2000-10000 people, can't meltdown or breech, are useless to terrorists, and require no maintenance. Doubt we'll go that way though.