This post was originally published on this site
https://i-invdn-com.investing.com/news/LYNXMPEB1O095_M.jpg
PG&E’s CEO Patti Poppe cited the memory of Feyla McLeod, an 8-year-old victim of a 2020 wildfire, as a motivation for the plan, asserting that buried lines would reduce wildfire chances by 99%. Despite this assertion, state regulators and the California Public Utilities Commission have contested the plan due to its $5.9 billion cost and extended implementation period.
As an alternative, these regulators suggested protective covers for overhead power lines as a cheaper but riskier alternative. This alternative could potentially reduce the number of power lines PG&E could bury by at least half. Matt Baker, director of the California Public Advocates Office, has urged for faster protection methods alongside PG&E’s plan.
The proposal has sparked concerns among California regulators due to its potential impact on already high customer rates. The proposal would raise customer rates by nearly 18%, a move criticized by Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group.
Other utilities like Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric have similar plans, intending to bury 600 miles and 1,645 miles of power lines respectively by 2028 and 2031. Florida Power and Light have also started burying power lines due to increasing natural disasters.
The issue carries broad implications, affecting insurance firms and ratepayers. Seven out of the top twelve California insurers have started limiting new business due to wildfire risk and The Utility Reform Network has reported a more than doubled increase in PG&E’s residential rates since 2006.
This remains an unresolved situation and a significant source of debate within California. PG&E plans to present its $5.9 billion plan to the state Public Utilities Commission next month. Despite the company’s conviction on 84 counts of manslaughter related to a 2018 wildfire and potential rate increases for customers, CEO Patti Poppe pledges commitment to safety.
This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.
