Did you read my earlier post? Above my pay grade.
Prayers For Maui...
- Thread starter K'Tesh
- Start date
Help Support The Rocketry Forum:
So you see the dilemma the utility is in?
Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
I never said I didn't, but you just implied I hadn't.
boatgeek
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 7,417
- Reaction score
- 7,971
You don't have to shut down the whole island at once. You'd have to have a lot more local knowledge than I do about how the network is set up and what the conditions on the ground are to triage, though. Three options:
Shut down areas where there are known hazard trees and transmission lines near high grass
Shut down areas near poles known to be in poor condition (most utilities don't want to admit they have poles in poor condition, of course)
Shut down areas known to have accelerated winds or where poles/wires regularly are broken by high wind
The inevitable investigations will show where things could have been done differently in hindsight, both on the power company's side and the fire department's side. And, unfortunately, it sometimes takes a disaster to force people to make changes. Without the Titanic sinking, you wouldn't have a lifeboat spot for every person on a cruise ship, for example.
You are presuming that I inferred something which, in fact, I did not.
That would not be logistically or politically feasible.
You can shut down power plants but chances are they would not only serve solely the red flag areas but also populated ateas as well.
And the political fallout would be intense.
Not to mention the economic fallout.
The State Attorney General has announced that she will be launching an investigation into the decision making processes during this tragedy.
Hopefully procedures will be improved for the future.
Hopefully procedures will be improved for the future.
Last edited:
There is an ad in my FB feed from a mainland law firm promoting legal assistance for the victims of the Maui wildfires.
All the victims have not been found and identified yet.
For Gods' sake, please show some decency.
Blood sucking leeches.
All the victims have not been found and identified yet.
For Gods' sake, please show some decency.
Blood sucking leeches.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 2,465
- Reaction score
- 1,978
I think the answer is 'it depends' from my perspective. Given the damage and loss of life that has been realized thus far, if it was downed power lines that caused it, then the least damaging solution likely would have been to shut them down. I imagine it is hot and regretfully, that might mean at-risk individuals could die from health related problems. There are probably other things that would happen during a power outage that could cause death.
I imagine vacationers would be inconvenienced a bit too, but I think the loss of life and property so far outweighs any of that.
Having said the above, if every time the wind blows, they shut down power, I imagine there would be a lot of push-back. Or, there would have been push-back until this catastrophe. Moving forward, hopefully mitigations can be put in place to ensure overall safety while limiting problems of losing power.
Very sorry to see this happening.
Understood.
The problem is there have been hundreds of times that NWS red flag conditions have existed in the state.
Don't remember a single time that power was deliberately shut down because of it.
And no runaway wildfires resulted,
Like they say, hindsight is always 20/20.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 2,465
- Reaction score
- 1,978
100% there with you. The long-term solution is likely to deal with power lines in a different way (i.e. underground or huge easements etc.) but that has its own set of problems.
The bottom line is that we should have figured out every possability for every outcome before any of the technology was invented and implemented all mitigations regardless of cost - a complete impossibility by definition. Once we can predict the future, we will either be completely immobilized by fear or maybe limit our future predictions to near-term where turning off the power would be logical vs. a constant nuisance.
The top question seemed quite rhetorical, so yes, I think you inferred I had not.
Some people just like stirring the pot. I give up.
To heck it’s not logistically or politically feasible. It’s become common practice in California and Eastern Washington when Red Flag conditions prevail.
Well, the latest I could find was the death toll was 113, can't find the number still missing. But returning to the subject of the thread, pray that the number of missing continues to drop without adding to the death toll. What an awful, awful tragedy.
The question has a simple yes or no answer, so it's not rhetorical at all.
You misinterpreted.
According to Hawaiian Electric the practice is controversial and not the industry standard.
That point of view may change after the investigation.
We shall see.
According to this article dated 2020 the PSPS (Public Safety Power Shutoff) is a new California utility practice that may be a harbinger of things to come.
https://www.power-grid.com/executiv...-a-utility-vegetation-management-perspective/
More info about the 2019 California PSPS:
"The shutdowns have drawn widespread fierce backlash and criticism from residents as well as government officials as PG&E, SCE, SDG&E and the California Public Utilities Commission issued an apology.[citation needed] Many residents complained of either being misinformed or not informed when shutdowns would occur, while officials such as California governor Gavin Newsom blamed the shutdowns on PG&E's "greed and mismanagement."[7] Some people expressed their frustrations through vandalism and violence, including the egging of a PG&E office's front doors and someone shooting at a PG&E vehicle.[8]
For the state's largest utility, PG&E, to bury all of its distribution lines (relatively low voltage lines which bring power to homes, not the higher voltage transmission lines) would cost US$15,000 per customer.[9]"
So yeah, political backlash.
"The shutdowns have drawn widespread fierce backlash and criticism from residents as well as government officials as PG&E, SCE, SDG&E and the California Public Utilities Commission issued an apology.[citation needed] Many residents complained of either being misinformed or not informed when shutdowns would occur, while officials such as California governor Gavin Newsom blamed the shutdowns on PG&E's "greed and mismanagement."[7] Some people expressed their frustrations through vandalism and violence, including the egging of a PG&E office's front doors and someone shooting at a PG&E vehicle.[8]
For the state's largest utility, PG&E, to bury all of its distribution lines (relatively low voltage lines which bring power to homes, not the higher voltage transmission lines) would cost US$15,000 per customer.[9]"
So yeah, political backlash.
Sure there is “political backlash”. That’s what politics is. Regardless utilities in California and Eastern Washington continue to use planned power outages during certain red flag conditions. Evidently for at least some utility companies the “backlash” from purposely shutting power off in vulnerable areas is more affordable than the “backlash” from having hundreds of homes burned to the ground and scores of fatalities.
I live here.
Of course I'm in favor of all measures to mitigate wildfire risk.
This could easily have been Oahu instead of Maui.
I'm just saying it's going to be a hard sell politically and economically.
As I said before, from the utilitys' perspective it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Of course I'm in favor of all measures to mitigate wildfire risk.
This could easily have been Oahu instead of Maui.
I'm just saying it's going to be a hard sell politically and economically.
As I said before, from the utilitys' perspective it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Ohio almost never has any kind if fire risk, but a decade or two ago we had some long high voltage lines that drooped under high load, touched overgrown undergrowth, armed, shorted, and created a cascade that put a chunk of the eastern seaboard in the dark. Had conditions been dry, there almost certainly would have been fire as well.
What grew out of that, were strict regulations by the public utilities regulator on maintenance of equipment as well as maintenance and mowing of the undergrowth.
What grew out of that, were strict regulations by the public utilities regulator on maintenance of equipment as well as maintenance and mowing of the undergrowth.
dr wogz
Fly caster
this made me mad:
and was brought to my attention by my kitchen contractor (We are in the middle of some major home renos..) "Did you hear about the fires in Maui?!?!"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66457091
and was brought to my attention by my kitchen contractor (We are in the middle of some major home renos..) "Did you hear about the fires in Maui?!?!"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66457091
Oh, dear God...
dr wogz
Fly caster
sadly, he believes it all..
hard to take someone seriously when they start spouting this stuff..
hard to take someone seriously when they start spouting this stuff..
boatgeek
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 7,417
- Reaction score
- 7,971
Grid shutdowns aren't an all or nothing proposition. Utilities can leave the power plants up and shut down portions of the grid. How large those areas are and how easy it is to shut down depends on how the local grid is built. As an example, there's (what appears to be) a manual shutoff on a power pole near me. It's a single handle that goes up to the ~4 kV distribution on the top of the poles. I don't know how much of the local grid would be taken down if that were pulled, or if there are centrally-controlled shutoffs either in the neighborhood or at substations.
As far as politics, I'll just say that electrical shutoffs were completely politically unfeasible in California and Eastern Washington until wildfires started by downed power lines wiped a few towns off the map. That focused people's attention on the downsides of the fire, not just the downsides of losing power.
You mentioned red flag warnings as a trigger. Those start with sustained winds or frequent gusts to 25 mph. I am guessing that if there are planned power shutdowns, they would be done at much higher wind speeds, say 40-50 mph. A higher trigger would reduce the length and scope of planned outages.
That's enough argufying for me. I'll sit back now.
ljwilley
I’m pretty sure it will work…
Makes me frustrated too. I know a lot of people like that. Believe everything that someone else tells them.
...as long as it implicates someone they don't like in evil deeds.
dr wogz
Fly caster
Sadly, though, this guy (and I assume other like him) tend to tote their "education" and their "smarts" and their ability to "find / see the truth.."
ljwilley
I’m pretty sure it will work…
exactly.
Since they basically have to start over, I wonder if they'll put new electric lines below ground?
ljwilley
I’m pretty sure it will work…
icyclops
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2013
- Messages
- 547
- Reaction score
- 253
True, here in California the utilities have the right to shut down certain areas of the power grid if winds get too high (I do not know what the cut off speed is).
It also supports the hubris of humanity by denying that modern civilization and all its power and technology can be at the mercy of weather and other natural forces.
Similar threads
