PG&E’s rolling blackouts
probably don’t eliminate fire risk, and they actually could make responding to
fires harder. What they largely do is shift responsibility away from the
company.
Oct. 22, 1:54 p.m. EDT
At the beginning of October,
my kids’ preschool informed me that it might be closed the next day because of
rolling blackouts — a radical new effort by our local power utility in Northern
California to avoid sparking wildfires. The water company, faced with the
shutdown of its pumps, asked us to fill our bathtubs before the cutoff. On the
advice of experts, my car was backed into the driveway for a quick escape, its
hatch packed with 7 gallons of water and a go-bag including leather gloves,
breathing masks, spare clothes, headlamps and emergency food.
The National Weather Service
was predicting 55-mile-an-hour winds, with 10% humidity. It was like living
inside a ticking time bomb. And so, in a desperate attempt to avoid detonation,
the utility decided to haul almost 800,000 households backward through time
into premodernity, for days at a stretch. Around Silicon Valley, residential
areas adjacent to some of the most technologically advanced corporations in the
world — the offices of private space-exploration companies, internet search engines,
electric vehicle manufacturers — would forgo basic electricity.
The blackouts solved nothing,
of course. De-energizing the electrical grid is a bludgeon: imprecise, with
enormous potential for collateral damage as people deal with a darkened world.
It doesn’t even eliminate fire risk. What it largely does is shift
responsibility away from Pacific Gas & Electric, the state’s largest
utility company, whose faulty
transmission lines had been found to have caused some of the most
destructive wildfires on record.
In fact, cutting power can
exacerbate some fire risks. In a blackout, more people rely on home generators,
many of which have been installed without permits and might be no less faulty
than the utility’s own equipment. Detours and gridlock force more cars into
vulnerable places. (Sparks off roadways are another top cause of wildfire.) The
blackout makes it harder for the public to respond to fire emergencies even as
it does little to prevent all the other factors that cause them — from careless
barbecues to tossed-out cigarette butts to plain old arson. One of the state’s
most serious fires so far this year was ignited by
burning garbage.
But a mandatory blackout does
have one radically positive effect. By suddenly withdrawing electrical power —
the invisible lifeblood of our unsustainable economic order — PG&E has made
the apocalyptic future of the climate crisis immediate and visceral for some of
the nation’s most comfortable people. It is easy to ignore climate change in
the bosom of the developed world. But you can’t fail to notice when the lights
go out.
Only once the blackouts began
to take effect did local agencies and governments seem to begin to grasp their
rippling effects and implications. As the city of Oakland prepared to lose
power, its Police Department — already strained by understaffing and rampant
corruption — called back its off-duty officers and put its investigative units
into uniform in the hopes of managing a city in the dark. Transportation
officials prepared to close four tunnels that make up one of the Bay Area’s
major highway arteries, effectively walling off thousands of people from their
jobs in downtown Oakland and San Francisco.
As the lights went out across
the region, the economies of whole towns and small cities ground to a halt.
Grocery stores and gas stations closed, air conditioning was shut off and cell
towers faltered — even as the cellphones themselves, now many households’ only
means of communication, slowly began to lose battery power. People whose lives
depended on home medical equipment faced life-threatening emergencies, and cars
— without operating gas pumps — risked running out of fuel. My own town sat on
the edge of an arbitrary boundary. The lights stayed on, but the mood was
ominous.
And it ought to be. In the
American West, our climate will only get hotter and drier, our wildfires worse.
Every year more places are going to burn, and we will, repeatedly, be horrified
by the losses. But we should not be shocked by them. The blackouts have laid
bare the uncomfortable fact that the infrastructure we’ve built and maintained
over the course of many decades isn’t matched to the threats we face in our
rapidly unfolding climate emergency.
The safest way to proceed
under such circumstances — on an annual basis, every time the thermometer kicks
up and the winds begin to blow — is probably not simply to forgo the use of one
of civilization’s most elementary and essential innovations. Significantly
lowering emissions, reducing waste, managing our landscape and fortifying our
communities would all do much more to save lives. But it’s hard to imagine that
even deep-blue California will make sufficient progress on the climate-adapting
steps we’ve long been implored to take.
At least mandatory blackouts
force a glimpse into this new reality. They’re like a thin wedge opening our
minds to the fact that even here, in the heart of one of the wealthiest regions
of a state that is (we are often reminded) by itself the world’s fifth-largest
economy — one that is shepherding into existence some of the nation’s most
enlightened and aggressive climate-adaptation policies — deep and unpredictable
consequences are unavoidable. Perhaps if blackouts were mandated in your
community, your neighbors might awaken to this eerie truth as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment