5 ms·

It should be nationalized so they can fix the problem instead of optimizing for bankruptcy liability or whatever.

by jitl 7y ago

TaylorAlexander 7y ago
Or perhaps a customer owned cooperative.
- rosybox 7y ago
  Sacramento has that, it's called SMUD. I don't know if it's any better. Are they keeping their lines and equipment free of tree branches? Are they having power outages? Are they blowing up neighborhoods?
  - TaylorAlexander 7y ago
    Yeah in all seriousness I like that structure for other reasons, but it’s not necessarily more likely to force foresight and proper maintenance. Government oversight and/or insurance companies should be enforcing fire safety here.
  - aerostable_slug 7y ago
    It's not really appropriate to compare any of the California municipal utilities to something like PG&E — SMUD isn't tiny, but they have a fraction of the T&D infrastructure of PG&E. Fair comparisons would be to San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison. Both have had selective power shutoffs in the recent wind. Also, note that SCE did not power down some lines and it appears their equipment caused a wildfire: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-18/saddleridge-fire-renews-debate-on-utilities-opaque-process-for-ordering-power-outages https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-18/saddleri... SDG&E has been using public safety power shutoffs for some time, and has a pretty good system of sectionalizers to make the outage areas more granular than PG&E's. That said, they don't have anywhere near the T&D infrastructure of PG&E.
vnchr 7y ago
On behalf of the rest of the nation, no thank you. What are options for Californians to communicate concerns to state and local legislators?
- CameronNemo 7y ago
  The Public Utilities Commission is most directly responsible for these matters. Just need to trace an elected official to there.
- aerostable_slug 7y ago
  The primary regulator is the California Public Utilities Commission, whose leadership consists of five governor-appointed commissioners. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/Contactus/ https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/Contactus/ https://govapps.gov.ca.gov/gov40mail/ https://govapps.gov.ca.gov/gov40mail/
bhl 7y ago
Not sure how nationalization would help. PG&E has a state monopoly right? What if we went in the opposite direction and allowed smaller companies in to start competing, like what we have with ISPs?
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  Most ISPs aren't able to start wildfires. What you'd get is a bunch of small companies competing. And, human nature being what it is, at least some of them would scrimp on maintenance and tree trimming, and hope that they'd continue to be lucky. And some of those wouldn't be lucky, and you'd still get fires. The difference would be that when Billy Bob's Power Company set off a multi-billion-dollar fire, it would just fold. Sally Sue's Power Company would buy up their assets (but not their liabilities) for pennies on the dollar, and you'd be left hoping that Sally Sue did better at maintenance than Billy Bob.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rubyn00bie 7y ago
  You can vote out elected officials, it forces transparency, and also has the bonus of a government multiplier[1], you can't do that with the C-levels of PG&E and a private company. Additionally, and I think this is non-debatable in the USA (though I'm up for debate, and to be wrong), C-levels have their primary and sole obligation to shareholders. When push comes to shove, and tough decisions need to be made, in the USA it is always in the interest of shareholders unless mandated by the government. Sometimes better businesses push for that mandate, so they can remain competitive and not be flaming piles of shit unable to compete... [2]. PG&E executives, right now, can use this (shareholder returns) as disguise for moral ineptitude in their social circles allowing them to escape ridicule as monsters. No amount of competition will fix these problems and incentivize the correct behaviour for a _utility_ as long as they're obligated to return dividends before moral decency. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier#United_States_of_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier#United_State... [2] This is also a vector for abuse by monopolies and oligopolies; where, they lobby for regulation which creates a barrier to entry (in the market) insurmountable to new organizations and institutions.
Pinckney 7y ago
Do you think taxpayers ought to be on the hook when a state-run electric company burns down a town, or should California invoke sovereign immunity when that happens?
- oldgradstudent 7y ago
  They're on the hook anyway. Be it with rate increases or with discharging of debts in bankruptcy. At least elected officials can be replaced.
- Aloha 7y ago
  They of course would be, if they were held to the same standard as PG&E.
gigatexal 7y ago
What government run entities are well managed? The federal government runs a deficit every year. State schools are always screaming for more funding and yet US children lag behind the world in math. The same incentives that exist while private will exist if public: avoid punishment and avoid losing your job at all costs because it’s just a simple infrastructure company with a monopoly to be a utility.
- thrwn_frthr_awy 7y ago
  > What government run entities are well managed? The National Park Service. > The federal government runs a deficit every year. There are many reasons for that, but it doesn't matter in deciding who should control California's power system. > State schools are always screaming for more funding and yet US children lag behind the world in math. Change "and yet" to "because" and I'm right there with you. > The same incentives that exist while private will exist if public: avoid punishment and avoid losing your job at all costs because it’s just a simple infrastructure company with a monopoly to be a utility. A publicly traded company is legal bound to motives ulterior to what is best for the people of California.

It should be nationalized so they can fix the problem instead of optimizing for bankruptcy liability or whatever.

by jitl 7y ago

It should be nationalized so they can fix the problem instead of optimizing for bankruptcy liability or whatever.

TaylorAlexander 7y ago

Or perhaps a customer owned cooperative.

rosybox 7y ago
Sacramento has that, it's called SMUD. I don't know if it's any better. Are they keeping their lines and equipment free of tree branches? Are they having power outages? Are they blowing up neighborhoods?
- TaylorAlexander 7y ago
  Yeah in all seriousness I like that structure for other reasons, but it’s not necessarily more likely to force foresight and proper maintenance. Government oversight and/or insurance companies should be enforcing fire safety here.
- aerostable_slug 7y ago
  It's not really appropriate to compare any of the California municipal utilities to something like PG&E — SMUD isn't tiny, but they have a fraction of the T&D infrastructure of PG&E. Fair comparisons would be to San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison. Both have had selective power shutoffs in the recent wind. Also, note that SCE did not power down some lines and it appears their equipment caused a wildfire: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-18/saddleridge-fire-renews-debate-on-utilities-opaque-process-for-ordering-power-outages https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-18/saddleri... SDG&E has been using public safety power shutoffs for some time, and has a pretty good system of sectionalizers to make the outage areas more granular than PG&E's. That said, they don't have anywhere near the T&D infrastructure of PG&E.

vnchr 7y ago

On behalf of the rest of the nation, no thank you. What are options for Californians to communicate concerns to state and local legislators?

CameronNemo 7y ago
The Public Utilities Commission is most directly responsible for these matters. Just need to trace an elected official to there.
aerostable_slug 7y ago
The primary regulator is the California Public Utilities Commission, whose leadership consists of five governor-appointed commissioners. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/Contactus/ https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/Contactus/ https://govapps.gov.ca.gov/gov40mail/ https://govapps.gov.ca.gov/gov40mail/

bhl 7y ago

Not sure how nationalization would help. PG&E has a state monopoly right? What if we went in the opposite direction and allowed smaller companies in to start competing, like what we have with ISPs?

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
Most ISPs aren't able to start wildfires. What you'd get is a bunch of small companies competing. And, human nature being what it is, at least some of them would scrimp on maintenance and tree trimming, and hope that they'd continue to be lucky. And some of those wouldn't be lucky, and you'd still get fires. The difference would be that when Billy Bob's Power Company set off a multi-billion-dollar fire, it would just fold. Sally Sue's Power Company would buy up their assets (but not their liabilities) for pennies on the dollar, and you'd be left hoping that Sally Sue did better at maintenance than Billy Bob.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
rubyn00bie 7y ago
You can vote out elected officials, it forces transparency, and also has the bonus of a government multiplier[1], you can't do that with the C-levels of PG&E and a private company. Additionally, and I think this is non-debatable in the USA (though I'm up for debate, and to be wrong), C-levels have their primary and sole obligation to shareholders. When push comes to shove, and tough decisions need to be made, in the USA it is always in the interest of shareholders unless mandated by the government. Sometimes better businesses push for that mandate, so they can remain competitive and not be flaming piles of shit unable to compete... [2]. PG&E executives, right now, can use this (shareholder returns) as disguise for moral ineptitude in their social circles allowing them to escape ridicule as monsters. No amount of competition will fix these problems and incentivize the correct behaviour for a _utility_ as long as they're obligated to return dividends before moral decency. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier#United_States_of_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier#United_State... [2] This is also a vector for abuse by monopolies and oligopolies; where, they lobby for regulation which creates a barrier to entry (in the market) insurmountable to new organizations and institutions.

Pinckney 7y ago

Do you think taxpayers ought to be on the hook when a state-run electric company burns down a town, or should California invoke sovereign immunity when that happens?

oldgradstudent 7y ago
They're on the hook anyway. Be it with rate increases or with discharging of debts in bankruptcy. At least elected officials can be replaced.
Aloha 7y ago
They of course would be, if they were held to the same standard as PG&E.

gigatexal 7y ago

What government run entities are well managed? The federal government runs a deficit every year. State schools are always screaming for more funding and yet US children lag behind the world in math. The same incentives that exist while private will exist if public: avoid punishment and avoid losing your job at all costs because it’s just a simple infrastructure company with a monopoly to be a utility.

thrwn_frthr_awy 7y ago
> What government run entities are well managed? The National Park Service. > The federal government runs a deficit every year. There are many reasons for that, but it doesn't matter in deciding who should control California's power system. > State schools are always screaming for more funding and yet US children lag behind the world in math. Change "and yet" to "because" and I'm right there with you. > The same incentives that exist while private will exist if public: avoid punishment and avoid losing your job at all costs because it’s just a simple infrastructure company with a monopoly to be a utility. A publicly traded company is legal bound to motives ulterior to what is best for the people of California.