Wild theory about Santa Rosa wildfires

[Rory]

https://www.ft.com/content/c86fe3fa-b38 ... d59db9e399

According to Krstic, grapevines are the crop that is most vulnerable to fire damage, and especially to the smoke that can taint the resulting wine. This is because grapes are particularly prone to absorb the volatile phenols in smoke that may combine with grape sugar to form compounds which during fermentation release unpleasant smoky or ashy odours in the wine, often appearing, or intensifying, as the wine matures in the bottle.

Doesn't look at all good for the 2017 harvest

[Burnt Hill]

https://www.ft.com/content/c86fe3fa-b38d-11e7-a398-73d59db9e399

According to Krstic, grapevines are the crop that is most vulnerable to fire damage, and especially to the smoke that can taint the resulting wine. This is because grapes are particularly prone to absorb the volatile phenols in smoke that may combine with grape sugar to form compounds which during fermentation release unpleasant smoky or ashy odours in the wine, often appearing, or intensifying, as the wine matures in the bottle.

Doesn't look at all good for the 2017 harvest

Unless you prefer a nice smoky Chardonnay!

I live in a smaller wine producing region.
There is also large amount of small cannabis growers here.
I think they did it.

[Iamwhomiam]

So you're now an expert on the psyche of arsonists, stickdog? Really, not that many crimes of arson involve profit as most arson crimes are committed by mentally ill people we call "pyromaniacs," to sate their own fantasy. https://tinyurl.com/ybfwgrll

This is why I have great difficulty engaging you in a discussion, stickdog, I ask you what the possible motive would be for starting the fires and you tell me it would be the same as any arsonist's, and that's no answer at all, but more of an evasion.

Evasion? LOL.

How should I know the motive of the arsonist(s)? As I said, I assume it would be the same as any arsonist's motive. My point was only that it would be no more surprising than any arson, which are committed for a variety of reasons including thrill seeking and financial motivations.

But are you telling me that arsonists typically set off a series of wildfires to watch thousands of acres burn while masturbating to their handiwork? For what vantage point do these pyromaniacs enjoy themselves? Since you are the expert here, I would love to see the data on what percentage of wildfires are attributed to pyromaniacs.

"We warned you this could happen."

Hey, it's better than directed energy as a first guess.

Not sure I am understanding. The conditions were obviously right for these wildfires to spread quickly and fiercely. But someone or something had to spark each individual fire. Are you saying someone did this because they were angry the land had not been cleared?

Not exactly. I'm saying that having had the plans of the lumber industry to remove lumber defeated, the arson being initiated by an agent of that industry, which forewarned these sort of fires would occur without carrying out their plan, made their worst predictions come true by engaging in crimes of arson, which could be interpreted as 'political retribution'', and that that would be a more likely scenario to raise as reason for the fires than would be raising Directed Energy Weapons (from outer [or inner?] space), for which you provided no motive aside from mentioning the broad category of "for profit," nor did you mention any potential suspect with means to possess and utilize such a weapon.

Motive and means.

As unlikely as what I suggested could be true, it is still a more probable scenario than directed energy weapons as causing these fires.

This is a discussion, right? You have a problem with me doubting your OP title or posing another scenario I feel more credible than yours?

edited to add: I gave you scads of links to learn more about the behavior of arsonists - or do you just expect people to give you all the answers with which you can then argue?

2nd edit: I've got an annual memorial to attend today and will have more to share later.

3rd edit: typo

[PufPuf93]

PG&E getting blamed for forest fires in California is rightfully so and not a new trend. One could claim that to blame PG&E is a reflex it is so common. Some examples of lawsuits where PG&E rightfully lost as defendant follow.

Judge Confirms PG&E To Pay For Butte Fire Victims’ Damages

Sacramento, CA — Sacramento Superior Court handed down its final legal determination today against PG&E regarding their liability for the Butte Fire.  The ruling finds PG&E liable under inverse condemnation for damages caused by the Butte Fire to private property. The motion was filed by both PG&E, and Steven M. Campora’s office by Dario de Getaldhi, Amanda Riddle, Frank Pitre, and Robert Jackson.

Gerold Singelton, a lawyer following the case representing Butte fire victims, says; “Any plaintiff that does go to trial [now] will be entitled to recover all damages they can prove for both real property and personal property. That is any property affixed to the land, like a house, or any thing that is on the land, trees, and erosion damages and for personal property, cars, anything like that, those are recoverable in the inverse condemnation claim. The court has now decided at the trial court level that PG&E is liable, and so if there is a trial all he or she will need to do is prove the amount of their damages.”

While PG&E is a private company, it serves as a public utility managed by the government due to its monopoly in California.  Since transporting electricity is inherently dangerous,  the damages PG&E was found to be liable for are covered under inverse condemnation. Inverse condemnation involves the taking of property by a government agency, in this case the publicly managed utility PG&E, which greatly damaged or destroyed the value of the property. An owner may claims he or she is entitled to payment for the loss of the property (in whole or in part) under the constitutional right to compensation under the government’s eminent domain right.
PG&E can appeal the court’s decision to a higher court.

The California Public Utilities Commission’s investigation found that PG&E did not have the minimum clearance required around its equipment and failed to maintain its overhead conductors safely and properly. A gray pine tree contacted a PG&E 12-kilovolt overhead electric conductor and ignited the fire on September 9, 2015. The Butte Fire burned 70,868 acres in Amador and Calaveras counties. It destroyed 549 homes, 368 outbuildings and four commercial buildings. It also resulted in two civilian fatalities and one injury.

https://www.mymotherlode.com/news/local ... mages.html

PG&E Guilty In 1994 Sierra Blaze / 739 counts of negligence for not trimming trees

A Nevada County jury found Pacific Gas and Electric Co. guilty yesterday of a pattern of tree-trimming violations that sparked a devastating 1994 wildfire in the Sierra.
The fire burned down a schoolhouse and 12 homes near the scenic Gold Rush town of Rough and Ready.

PG&E was convicted of 739 counts of criminal negligence for failing to trim trees near its power lines -- the biggest criminal conviction ever against the state's largest utility.

The six-man, six-woman jury delivered the verdict after three days of deliberations. It took the court clerk 1 1/2 hours to read all the counts.

The utility will not be able to pass along to its customers any costs associated with the trial or any fines imposed as a result of the convictions, prosecutors said.

The jury deadlocked on four misdemeanor counts. Judge Carlos Baker declared a mistrial on those counts and scheduled a sentencing hearing for July 2.

The verdict comes as the utility is dogged by complaints about its fire-prevention efforts near power lines. The case may encourage similar prosecutions by other counties.

California Department of Forestry investigators have determined that several other major wildfires, and hundreds of smaller wildfires, have been caused in recent years by PG&E's failure to comply with safety regulations. PG&E has been slapped by state and county officials with several thousand tree-trimming violations.

State law sets minimum distances of up to 10 feet between flammable vegetation and high- voltage lines and also mandates firebreaks around power poles.
"Hopefully, this sends a message to upper-level PG&E management that they must do whatever is necessary to comply with the law and protect public safety," said Nevada County Deputy District Attorney Jenny Ross.

During the three-month trial, a prosecution expert testified that PG&E bilked its customers of nearly $80 million by diverting funds from its trimming program into shareholder profits.

More at:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/PG-E ... 821364.php

PG&E, Contractors To Pay $51M To End Calif. Wildfire Suits


Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and its contractors have agreed to pay $50.5 million to settle litigation over two California wildfires that burned more than 18,000 acres of national forest and cost $13.5 million to suppress, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Thursday.
The U.S. alleges that the defendants' neglect caused the Power Fire and the Whiskey Fire, which occurred in October 2004 and June 2008, respectively. The first fire occurred in Eldorado National Forest in Amador County in a remote location near the Salt Springs Reservoir, and the second transpired on Mendocino National Forest land in Tehama County.

Crew members hired by contractor VCS Sub Inc., which does business as Provco, to trim trees and brush near a PG&E distribution line allegedly started the Power Fire after discarding lit cigarettes during a work break. The Whiskey Fire ignited after PG&E transmission lines came into contact with tree branches that were only 1.3 feet away from the lines, which is far below the minimum amount of clearance required by state law, according to the government.

“Like many forest fires, both the Power Fire and the Whiskey Fire could have easily been avoided,” U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner said in a Thursday statement. “We hope that in addition to helping repair the long-term damage caused by the fires, these settlements will reinforce the need to be safe when conducting risky operations in and around our national forests.”

The defendants deny culpability in either fire.

The Power Fire complaint, filed in August in California federal court, alleged that PG&E had the power to control contractor Provco's fire safety policies and training. It said neither company had any policies governing smoking in the woods, nor did they train workers on how to safely light, smoke and extinguish cigarettes in the woods.

The Power Fire lasted for 17 days, burned roughly 17,000 total acres and cost roughly $8.46 million for hundreds of firefighters to extinguish, the government said. The fire allegedly consumed enough timber to build 9,500 single-family homes, decimated protected habitats for a variety of sensitive species and destroyed irreplaceable American Indian historical sites.

According to the Whiskey Fire settlement, PG&E and contractors ACRT Inc. and Davey Tree Surgery Company failed to trim the pine branches, which contacted the line, caught fire, fell to the ground and ignited nearby vegetation. That fire lasted eight days, burned roughly 5,000 total acres and cost $5 million to extinguish.

The Whiskey Fire lawsuit never made it to court.

Under the terms of the Power Fire settlement, Provco and its owner, Quanta Services Inc., Provco will pay a joint settlement amount of $45 million. The Whiskey Fire agreement entails ACRT paying $2.5 million, and PG&E and Davey Tree Surgery paying $1.5 million each, for a total of $5.5 million.

“These settlement funds are important to helping achieve our ecological restoration goals for those forests impacted by these fires,” U.S. Forest Service Regional Forester Randy Moore said in a Thursday statement.

The settlements come 15 months after PG&E paid $29.5 million to the federal government to resolve litigation stemming from two other California forest fires that occurred in 2004. The Freds Fire and the Sims Fire collectively burned more than 7,600 acres of National Forest land.

"Since the [Whiskey Fire], we've evaluated our policies and procedures to ensure that we're reducing the risk of fire and safeguarding our natural resources," PG&E spokeswoman Jana Morris said Thursday.

Spokespersons and attorneys for Quanta, Provco and Davey Tree Surgery did not immediately respond to requests for comment Thursday.

Quanta and VCS Sub are represented by Brian D. Bertossa of Cook Brown LLP.

PG&E is represented by Laura L. Goodman and Gregory C. Read of Sedgwick LLP.

Davey Tree Surgery Company is represented by Robert M. Blum of Nixon Peabody LLP.

ACRT Inc. is represented by Kenneth F. Strong of Gordon & Rees LLP.

The Power Fire case is USA v. Quanta Services Inc. et al., case number 2:12-cv-02043, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.

https://www.law360.com/articles/448170/ ... fire-suits

[PufPuf93]

Two personal anecdotes about PG&E and right away clearing.

In 2003 I worked for a short time for the Yurok Tribe. One of the projects was to put PG&E lines and Verizon lines from just below Weitchpec and down to Johnsons on the east side of the Klamath and across the Martin's Ferry Bridge and down Tully Creek Road on the west side of the Klamath, this is an area of the Yurok Reservation that until that construction had no power nor phone service. . My 2nd day of work contractors already hired by the Tribe began clearing the ROW for the power and phone lines. Within hours Caltrans threatened an injunction (warranted) and the project stopped temporarily to work out issues. Obviously there were problems with the project. One was that the Tribe had not yet secured contracts with PG&E (and Verizon) to install the poles and build the power and telephone lines but had gone ahead with the clearing because of a budget issue (as in use or lose the Federal grant).

I got to learn about the specifications for PG&E power line ROW clearing (and hope and expect that they have been modified). The PG&E boiler plate contract specifications for width of the ROW clearing was based solely on the height of the poles. Factors such as size and potential size of adjacent trees, slope, and soils were not directly considered. The line was being installed in an area of very large trees, on steep slopes, on soils subject to slides, and an area of very heavy rainfall. Like I say I hope and expect such specs have been revised.

Where I live farther up the Klamath Canyon the electricity goes out frequently because of weather, slides, trees, and occasional equipment failures. Also this is an area of extremely low population. Going upriver PG&E power goes +/- 13 miles to north of Somes Bar then there is a dead zone of about 30 miles until south of Happy Camp. Pacific Power and Light serve Happy Camp and north, dipping out of OR. I have an integrated propane generator for outages that can last for days and are a fact of life here, Not only is the country rugged but this is the farthermost corner of PG&E service and last to be fixed regards priority.

I have talked to several other old timers here and also a friend from 2 hours away in Trinity county and I broached the idea that we had more outages that lasted longer than in the past. They all agreed. The highway has two lanes and is considered narrow and curvy but nothing like it was until straightened and widened in late 60s and early 70's. The drop off into the River is often 100s of feet. The power poles followed closely along the original highway. There were not telephones until 1973. There is a microwave relay near a mountain top that beams telephone signals to a receiver in the small valley and nearby environs (me) and there are maybe 300 local phones on the system. The telephone are very robust and I have only experienced two outages(granted I have lived here less than 1/2 the time since phones came): (1) Maybe 10 years ago a forest fire burned through the receiver on the mountain top, (2) Back in the 70s someone stole a rubber tired log loader off a logging job in the middle of the night and drove to the village and attacked the cinderblock building with the valley receiver on top. Then they parked the log loader nearby in one of my friend's driveways and left it with the engine running. Jeff was roused out of bed by authorities who initially blamed him after he already was sleep distracted by all the racket.

Back to the topic of PG&E lines; when the highway was widened PG&E installed large metal towers for the trunk line. The spans from tower to tower were much larger than from pole to pole and, while ROW is wider, it also no longer follows the highway and is on some very gnarly terrain that is harder to maintain and less stable than the highway prism. The power goes out more frequently and outages are longer because of more dynamic geology and trees in the newer power line location. Also sometimes a problem is identified and fixed only to find out there were other problems not yet identified. Damage is harder and takes more time to fix and locate because access often requires a helicopter and in all cases is more complicated than parking next to poles on the highway. Probably it would have been cheaper for PG&E to string the line along the new highway location and outages would occur less often and repairs not take as long. Burying service has been considered but is cost prohibited because of the few customers but also because the soils slide as a fact of being. The highway requires near constant repair.

[Iamwhomiam]

Wires downed by falling tree branches is the most common cause for power outages in my area, but we did once have a transformer explode that was on a pole across the road and once down the street a pole-mounted fuse failed that limited the outage to a dozen or so homes.

Was Caltrans administering the funds for the Tribe or were they in some way overseeing the entire project because it was to run along their right of way? I would think CalEPA would have been the party to halt work because they had not issued all of the required permits, because their application showed no proof of contract with PG&E or Verizon, which would also have been required to be disclosed on the application for the permit.

The sad thing about holding PG&E liable is they recoup their loss from ratepayers. But they certainly cut corners in maintenance, saving oodles, and should be held liable and perhaps prosecuted in some extreme cases of gross neglect.

[PufPuf93]

Wires downed by falling tree branches is the most common cause for power outages in my area, but we did once have a transformer explode that was on a pole across the road and once down the street a pole-mounted fuse failed that limited the outage to a dozen or so homes.

Was Caltrans administering the funds for the Tribe or were they in some way overseeing the entire project because it was to run along their right of way? I would think CalEPA would have been the party to halt work because they had not issued all of the required permits, because their application showed no proof of contract with PG&E or Verizon, which would also have been required to be disclosed on the application for the permit.

The sad thing about holding PG&E liable is they recoup their loss from ratepayers. But they certainly cut corners in maintenance, saving oodles, and should be held liable and perhaps prosecuted in some extreme cases of gross neglect.

The Tribe had a Federal grant for the ROW clearing and managed the contract and payment (just not very well). (Edit to add: This was my 2nd day of work and we met in the office about the job and then drove to the work site where the work had already been stopped and the circus commenced. A fellow that supposedly worked for me had done the field work and everything had been approved by my supervisor, the Planning Department Director) The Tribe had not obtained an encroachment permit for operating on the State Highway. Plus the Tribe had approved work methods that would have destroyed the road surface (dropping large trees with stubs of branches onto road and then dragging on road surface with a rubber tires skidder was approved by Tribe and the equipment was moved on the site. So the Tribe had no permit, no approved safety plan (though they at least did have flag people), no approved closure plan compounded by approving operations that would have destroyed the road. Folks started to complaining to the Tribe office within an hour of the work starting and Caltrans was on site to stop the work within 2 hours. The Tribe did stop work as soon as CalTrans was on site but by noon the Caltrans attorneys had informed the Tribe that there would be an immediate court injunction should the Tribe not stop the work. The large trees should not have been felled onto the pavement and if that was only choice should have been climbed and limbs cut flush and a bed of logs put on the road way so protect the road surface. Also rather than dragging logs down the road way, they ended up being picked up in the forks of a rubber tired log loader and moved along the highway to collection areas. There were many other problems with the job (one of the reason I guess I was hired) and I did not stay long. I knew the then Tribe Vice Chair and the Chief Governance Officer essentially all my life and was hired specifically to get the Tribe folks already involved and the job on track. There was no construction contract yet with PG&E (and Verizon) and the PG&E project Manager and Project Engineers had been directed not to talk any more to Tribe without PG&E attorneys present. Caltrans had no control or financial interest in the project. Part was along State Highway. Part was along county road (where a similar permit and interaction was required but did not occur), and along a long stretch of Tribal road that was newly reconstructed and would have been destroyed. Also permission had not been granted for many private parcels along the route and PG&E ultimately accepted the burden of getting all the ROWs secured. It was that fucked up. I quit after 4 months even when offered another position in another department with the Tribe.

In the articles I posted about PG&E being fined for other fires, there was specific language in the court decision that PG&E could not pass through the fines to customers but were to be borne by shareholders. Part of the damage claims were based upon PG&E not spending to maintain the vegetation control along the power lines and taking the funds for profit and dividends.

[Iamwhomiam]

Thanks for providing more details. I only read your posting and not the links. Sounds like you were called into a real mess to deal with and agree the tribe was irresponsible in the felling of trees onto the unprotected roadway. It makes perfect sense CalTrans intervened.

Nice to hear stockholders were held liable and unable to pawn their fine off on ratepayers. Rarely the case locally with our power provider, National Grid, a multinational energy concern headquartered in England.

[PufPuf93]

Thanks for providing more details. I only read your posting and not the links. Sounds like you were called into a real mess to deal with and agree the tribe was irresponsible in the felling of trees onto the unprotected roadway. It makes perfect sense CalTrans intervened.

Nice to hear stockholders were held liable and unable to pawn their fine off on ratepayers. Rarely the case locally with our power provider, National Grid, a multinational energy concern headquartered in England.

Not to defend PG&E but if one searches it is almost a matter of course now to look to PG&E for recourse for large fires in forested California. Recall PG&E also had the natural gas explosion from old pipes in the San Mateo area that killed people and destroyed several urban blocks several years ago.

PG&E is clearly at fault if vegetation is not managed to spec in its ROW and also when equipment is not properly maintained. But there is a fine line between a so-called "act of nature" and negligence. Also say that a start is on PG&E responsible ground but what causes the fire storm is the condition regards to vegetation and fuel adjacent to the ROW and across the landscape?

This is why forest thinning is championed by forest ecologists at Cal (UC Berkeley) and the USFS Research branch to remove fuel ladders and reduce fuel loads while re-establishing forest composition and fire regimes to what occurred prior to European exploitation. The action is not going to occur everywhere but strategically in the landscape. There is an allergy among some (and probably you) to the removal of material for any commercial use. I explained in an earlier post the various controls and limitations of the proposed treatment. Mills and loggers do not like to deal with burnt timber and of which there is no shortage despite fire salvage seldom occurring on federal lands (blow back from short sighted practices in the past).

Corporate timber owners do not want their forests to burn. Something in the Western corporate forests that few have noted is that the 2nd and later growth trees are being grown longer, and larger, and with higher stand volumes than what was common wisdom 20 years ago. Clear cuts are reduced not just because of laws and PR but because it makes good sense. There are also different financial structures (REITs, MLPs) that provide a desirable relatively high yield investment to long term investors like insurance companies and pension funds so forests products firms are less often the equity owners. Forests are valued with modern math models like various option pricing methods and CAPM instead of discounted cash flow (which drives the larger and older trees and higher per area inventories in the corporate forests). Forests can be a financial investment rather than a raw material inventory for a manufacturing plant. Liquidity can be provided by financial transactions rather than only by cutting the trees. Corporate forest management is only going to be changed by $$$ barring a major change in social organization. But there is some practical ecological slack. This is what the forest ecologists / scientists see. This is what I see as I was a forest ecologist / research scientist / engineer / economist for 35 years (and have been retired for over a decade and did little forestry after 2001). I am not an apologist.

But we are far from where what is necessary to maintain forest cover. Personally I am pessimistic about humanity. By categorically saying that forest thinning is a bad thing you have taken away the biggest tool to address climate change, the damage caused buy current wild fires, and the human relation to the western forests. The climate is going to change, forests are going to burn, there are going to be an increasing number of extinctions. Humans are going to have selfish and corrupt motivations. Humans disappoint me but I do kind of like RI. There are many dinosaurs at large hell-bent on extinction.

[stickdog99]

Did multiple PG&E transformers explode on the night of 10/8?

https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/10/11/in ... -of-fires/

Investigators Look Into Downed Power Lines, Exploding Transformers as Possible Cause of Fires

The Bay Area News Group reported Wednesday that Sonoma County dispatchers sent fire crews out to at least 10 locations over a 90-minute period, starting around 9:20 p.m. on Sunday, to respond to calls about electrical problems.

Cal Fire spokeswoman Janet Upton said the agency is investigating whether reports of power lines falling down and electrical transformers exploding in Sonoma County Sunday night may have caused some of the wildfires in the region.

The agency stresses that it’s investigating a number of potential causes. PG&E spokesman Jason King said the crews found wires down, broken poles and impacted infrastructure.

[stickdog99]

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigatio ... 96923.html

The state’s last regulatory audit of the PG&E division ravaged by the North Bay firestorm warned the utility that it was late in fixing more than 3,500 known electrical problems in Santa Rosa and Sonoma alone, records reviewed by NBC Bay Area show.

The findings of the California Public Utilities Commission’s PG&E Sonoma Division audit -- performed in September 2015 – point to concerns about PG&E maintenance practices well before the fires that destroyed nearly 5,000 homes and claimed 42 lives. PG&E has filed eight separate regulatory notices of electrical equipment failures in the fires.

In a December 31, 2015 audit letter to the utility, Fayi Daye, a supervising electric safety regulator with the state’s Public Utilities Commission, outlined the violations found in the review of records between 2010 and 2015 and a spot check of the division’s electrical distribution equipment.

Daye noted that the auditors’ review of repair records for the areas that would become hardest hit by the fires -- Santa Rosa and Sonoma -- showed the company was behind schedule on a total of 3,527 separate repair orders.

“Late work orders included overhead and underground facilities,” Daye noted.

The audit also checked PG&E’s maps of electrical distribution lines and found more than 50 pieces of overhead equipment – including pole mounted transformers and lines themselves-- had not been inspected yearly as required under state rules.

Spot checks showed that for one power pole in Santa Rosa, a supporting cable was not properly connected to assure the pole could remain standing. Inspectors also found that communications gear had been spliced onto the line and was dangling 10 feet from the ground.

“PG&E did not notify the communications company of this safety hazard when it last inspected the pole,” Daye’s report noted. In another location in Somona, inspectors found “noticeable slack” on a support strut between poles.
The PUC didn’t issue any fines in the audit. Critics were dismayed by the findings.

“This is particularly alarming because these citations are where the fires happened," said Britt Strottman, and attorney for the counties ravaged by the San Bruno pipeline fire and the massive Butte fire in 2015. She says the audit reflects a troubling pattern. "PG&E has a history of neglecting its infrastructure and this is more evidence of that."

State Sen. Jerry Hill was also troubled by the findings and wants to make sure regulators do a better job of monitoring the utility's repair efforts. “It was very shocking,” Hill said.

“Thirty five hundred jobs not completed really was a surprise because they are getting the money for these, they are getting the funds to do the work in a timely manner.”

[stickdog99]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/10/ ... 289609.jpg

[PufPuf93]

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/State-Audit-Shows-PGE-Had-Repair-Job-Backlog-in-Sonoma-Santa-Rosa-451996923.html

The state’s last regulatory audit of the PG&E division ravaged by the North Bay firestorm warned the utility that it was late in fixing more than 3,500 known electrical problems in Santa Rosa and Sonoma alone, records reviewed by NBC Bay Area show.

The findings of the California Public Utilities Commission’s PG&E Sonoma Division audit -- performed in September 2015 – point to concerns about PG&E maintenance practices well before the fires that destroyed nearly 5,000 homes and claimed 42 lives. PG&E has filed eight separate regulatory notices of electrical equipment failures in the fires.

In a December 31, 2015 audit letter to the utility, Fayi Daye, a supervising electric safety regulator with the state’s Public Utilities Commission, outlined the violations found in the review of records between 2010 and 2015 and a spot check of the division’s electrical distribution equipment.

Daye noted that the auditors’ review of repair records for the areas that would become hardest hit by the fires -- Santa Rosa and Sonoma -- showed the company was behind schedule on a total of 3,527 separate repair orders.

“Late work orders included overhead and underground facilities,” Daye noted.

The audit also checked PG&E’s maps of electrical distribution lines and found more than 50 pieces of overhead equipment – including pole mounted transformers and lines themselves-- had not been inspected yearly as required under state rules.

Spot checks showed that for one power pole in Santa Rosa, a supporting cable was not properly connected to assure the pole could remain standing. Inspectors also found that communications gear had been spliced onto the line and was dangling 10 feet from the ground.

“PG&E did not notify the communications company of this safety hazard when it last inspected the pole,” Daye’s report noted. In another location in Somona, inspectors found “noticeable slack” on a support strut between poles.
The PUC didn’t issue any fines in the audit. Critics were dismayed by the findings.

“This is particularly alarming because these citations are where the fires happened," said Britt Strottman, and attorney for the counties ravaged by the San Bruno pipeline fire and the massive Butte fire in 2015. She says the audit reflects a troubling pattern. "PG&E has a history of neglecting its infrastructure and this is more evidence of that."

State Sen. Jerry Hill was also troubled by the findings and wants to make sure regulators do a better job of monitoring the utility's repair efforts. “It was very shocking,” Hill said.

“Thirty five hundred jobs not completed really was a surprise because they are getting the money for these, they are getting the funds to do the work in a timely manner.”

The PUC and courts have been on the tail of PG&E for over 20 years over equipment maintenance and vegetation management with multiple court judgements against PG&E. Keeping the vast system in compliance is Sisyphusian in nature. One has to wonder if it can be done without a redesign of the entire infrastructure or perhaps a shift to public ownership (which could address nothing except to not have shareholders liable).

If PG&E is 100% in compliance for maintenance and vegetation management, fire events are still going to occur, just less frequent and easier to stop. But even then what about the vegetation immediate adjacent to the ROW and the vegetation condition on the landscape?

One solution is to bury power lines but that is not always possible. More use of dispersed generation, primarily solar, would reduce the use of transmission lines.

[stickdog99]

Unprecedented wind gusts on the night of the fires were set.

For example, at 10:30 PM on 9 Oct 2017 the wind gusted to 96 mph on a 3400 foot peak NE of Geyersville, about 20 miles NNW of downtown Santa Rosa. They reported sustained 74 knots (85 mph). Those are hurricane force winds (sustained of 64 knots or more).





What is really amazing about the winds at these sites, was that they were unprecedented: the strongest winds on record, with records going back to 1991 (Santa Rosa) or 1993 (Hawkeye). And we are not talking about winds during the fall, but winds any time during the year. Even during the stormy winter season when powerful storms can cross the region.

At low-levels, the situation was more mixed. For example, at Napa Valley Airport (36 ft), the sustained winds at 11:15 PM October 9 (37 knots) were the strongest observed (looking back to 2001) at that location from July 1- November 30, while at the Santa Rosa Airport (KSTS) the sustained winds only reached 28 mph, with 40 mph gusts.

So why were the winds so strong and unprecedented at higher levels in the hills? These winds were key for causing the wildfires to explode and to quickly move into populated regions. And the winds undoubtedly damaged power transmission lines and thus helped start electrical fires, which may, in fact, have initiated the big wildfire runs. And why were the lower-level winds less severe? What can explain such differences?

...

The creation of such downslope mountain-wave type windstorms is very sensitive to the characteristics of the air moving towards the mountains. You not only need strong approaching flow, but the proper vertical structure of temperature and winds. Clearly such conditions don't happen often--otherwise similarly strong winds would have occurred before. There is no reason to expect that such extreme wind conditions were made more probable by global warming.

...

From the comments:

Good writeup Cliff. I have been a meteorologist in Northern California for over 40 years and helped develop the California RAWS program and CANSAC. Quite a while back a fire weather meteorologist from Southern California gave wrote a paper that attributed the strong “Sundowners” to a hydrostatic jump. Interesting that the temperature at Santa Rosa jumped to 91 degrees when the winds spiked, seems to support the surfacing mountain wave.

[stickdog99]

http://www.ktvu.com/news/dispatch-calls ... estigation

Firefighters in Napa and Sonoma Counties called in more than a dozen reports of downed power lines, live wires, and blown transformers in just the first three hours after devastating wildfires erupted in the North Bay, according to dispatch audio reviewed by 2 Investigates.

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. responded to questions about its power system in a statement Wednesday, saying 75 mph winds and dry vegetation contributed to some trees and debris “impacting” electric lines. The cause of the fires, which had claimed 31 lives as of Thursday night is still under investigation.

“That’s PG&E issuing something that is soft peddling the issue,” said attorney Frank Pitre. Pitre is a strong critic of the gas and electric company due to its involvement in the San Bruno explosion and the deadly 2015 Butte Fire. PG&E was fined $8 million after investigators found one of its line hitting a tree caused the flames. “[They] admit their lines are involved and equipment was involved, but try to redirect people to believing this was because of high winds that were unforeseen,” he said. “I don’t buy that at this stage.”

According to dispatch audio between fire crews in the first few hours of the firefight, multiple spot fires erupted near the sites of down power lines and fallen trees.

In one exchange between firefighters in Napa County, crews on the ground called in downed wires and a blown transformer near Linda Vista and Lone Oaks Avenue around 9:15 p.m. Sunday. And about 15 minutes later, crews can be heard reporting a fire in the same area. It’s unclear whether that particular fire was quickly knocked down or possibly grew into a larger blaze.