California Electric Utilities Have Few Wildfire Options

It’s no secret that the California electric utilities are scrambling to find solutions to the state’s growing forest fire problem.  Despite some immediate repercussions such as the PG&E bankruptcy and the implementation of planned outages, the state’s residents understandably crave a more reliable power supply, fires notwithstanding. 

Unfortunately, there does not appear to be any easy fix. 

What Options Exists for the California Electric Utilities?

Early in 2019, the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) assembled a committee comprised of the CEOs of various electric utilities to discuss potential solutions.  The CEOs came from multiple states, because even though California is ground zero for the problem, it’s likely just a matter of time before the majority of states with heavy forest cover begin to face the same nightmare.    

Overall, the options the committee came up with seem sub-optimal, either because they are too expensive, too difficult to execute, or both.  Below is a list of the 4 most viable options.

One option the committee came up with is improved vegetation management.  Although proactive vegetation control is a necessity for any utility, it’s not the “golden ring” solution that the California electric utilities need.  The reason is that there is simply too much ground to cover for this solution to make a material dent in fire prevention.  PG&E alone has 125,000 miles of lines surrounded by millions of trees.  There simply is not enough manpower available for this to solve the fire problem.  Plus, cut trees must be removed so they do not burn, adding another expensive and complicating factor.

Another option is undergrounding the lines.  Unfortunately, not only would this take decades, but this solution is prohibitively expensive due to the careful placement that would be required in areas prone to earthquake activity.  For example, the cost for PG&E to bury residential lines is estimated at $3 million per mile, with high voltage lines costing an incredible $80 million per mile.  The company, which is bankrupt, would be looking at roughly $400 billion for this solution.  Nope, not going to happen. 

The last two options seem more viable than the first two – surveillance technology to provide early warning detection of equipment failure, and microgrids.  Using surveillance technology seems like a good idea, but like the other options it is cost prohibitive, likely costing tens of millions of dollars to implement.  Microgrids are probably the most viable option, as they can self-generate, provide storage options, and can be isolated from the grid to reduce outages and help isolate problems before they spread.  And the price tag is probably not as high as the other potential options.

So, what are the California electric utilities to do?  Only time will tell.  Microgrids seem like the best option right now, but the cold hard truth is that no silver bullet solution currently exists.