What if, on the first day of Christmas, your true love gave to you the joy of uninterruptable power service? Wouldn’t that be the greatest gift ever? A Christmas miracle?
Granted, uninterruptable power service isn’t possible. I know that. Although, to be fair, utilities do a darn good job of making an outage a truly rare thing. They can’t really control Mother Nature, but they give it the good ol’ college try. I can say, actually, that I haven’t had any noticeable outages this year---maybe a flicker during a storm. But, everything came right back on quickly, including during the long ice storm in February where I spent a good hour whacking giant icicles off my house with a shovel. (It looked like my front porch had a scary mouth full of pointy monster teeth.)
Sadly, though, uninterruptable power wasn’t always the case at my abode.
As I finished wrapping my piles of Christmas presents this year, I was reminded of a time about three years ago, a day when I was running early on Christmas purchases and had just started wrapping when the lights went out. Darkness. Complete. I tried to remember where I stuck the flashlight. Then, there was a flicker of power hope. The TV recovered, then the lights. Then it was off again. Total. I did remember where the flashlight was, finally.
And the power was off for nine days.
A freak ice storm had taken down half of the city. Limbs were everywhere. I spent that night listening to sirens, to limbs fall and to the crackle of transformer explosions. And that night I hoped for a Christmas miracle. It was down near 20 degrees. I was buried under blankets with my clothes (including shoes) still on clinging to the last bits of battery in both my flashlight and cell phone.
And, all I wanted for Christmas was power. Not those awesome Hello Kitty slippers. Not some delicious summer sausage from Hickory Farms. Just power.
I got that wish, finally. In fact, I got it in a rather Scrooge moment. I’d been without power for nine days. After the flashlight went out and I realized the cell phone was near that point as well, I called my father who came and did what daddies do. He rescued me. (His house had power.) I returned to my place over the following weekend and had just gotten good and thoroughly chilled again when I noticed that my neighbors across the street had power.
In fact, they had so much power that they strung Christmas lights into the front yard to show it off. Or, perhaps, to show off their Christmas spirit. But, I wasn’t feeling the Christmas spirit at that moment. I was feeling irked. Their act of Christmas spirit was irksome.
And, I stood in the doorway, wrapped in blankets, contemplating a loud, primal “bah-humbug” and flinging myself across the street to rip down every last shiny strand like a madwoman.
Then, behind me in the dark, I heard the refrigerator kick on. It took a second for me to figure out the significance. When I did, I ran around the house turning on everything that required power: the lights, the televisions, the heater. I was giddy with the power of power. It was, for me, a Christmas miracle. (I even did a little dance. Don’t tell anyone.) There is no gift like the joys of modern life, the comfort of heat and light and those tiny people inside the TV.
So, as I finish wrapping these gifts three years later, I am still thankful of my greatest gift of all: a (mostly) uninterruptable flow of power.
To AEP-PSO: Thank you for a good year of good service. You’ve given me exactly what I want for Christmas.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Thursday, December 16, 2010
The zombie apocalypse power primer part 2: Would renewables have made for a happier apocalypse?
An office friend---doesn’t seem right to call him a mere coworker---and I are both addicted to the AMC zombie series “The Walking Dead.” The finale of the (sadly very short) season aired a couple of weeks ago. Our hearty band of survivors made a break for the Atlanta Centers for Disease Control and, once there, came upon another annoying apocalypse: The power was going out, even in an important spot like the CDC.
Sure, the CDC had back-up power when the first wave of zombies got tangled in distribution lines or gnawed through rural poles looking for tasty woodpeckers and took out part of the local grid. Like all major infrastructure points, they had generators. Big ones. But, two months into this new world, the generators were running out of fuel. There were no back-up options. All the back-up options (those generators) were too temporary to sustain the place for the apparently long-winded zombie overrun.
Even if there were more fuel for the generators, eventually, since fuel was no longer being made, even the last ones would sputter down and shut off. One of the characters comments that the power grid isn’t meant to run without fossil fuels. In fact, he laments, “Fossil fuels? How stupid were we?”
Actually, not that stupid.
Granted, the designers of the power grid didn’t think ahead to impending zombie horde takeover and how that would impact the system, but, sadly, even if today’s grid were run on wind energy, at some point a character in that story would have to comment, “Wind energy? How stupid were we?”
Because, it’s not about the fuel; it’s about the path.
The fact remains that the problem with our grid (were there to be a disastrous apocalypse of pretty much any type) is the system. It’s interconnected. It’s complicated. It’s tied from big generators (whether they are coal, natural gas, nukes or large wind farms) to end-users in a long stream of transmission lines, substations, ties, distribution lines, step-down transformers and meters---all of which are vulnerable and require oversight. Even if the fuel at the beginning of this chain were of a green variety, the way to plan ahead for power to aide a small band of survivors is not to change the fuel, it’s to also change the system. And that can’t really be done.
If you need to plan for small pockets of power to run individually, you have to island yourself, you have to isolate (either an area or a home) and figure out how to be your own system from fuel to use---the whole power cycle. You’d have to have renewables connected to your house (solar panels, wind turbines) and be able to use the flow directly. (And, of course, you’d have to have those renewables manufactured and installed pre-zombies, I’d imagine.)
In reality (and not on cable tv), it’s not practical to plan for the apocalypse. Instead, we plan for the most efficient system for the time (and for short outages when they happen). And, at the time the power grid was established, it was the most practical, pragmatic system. It got put together in bits and pieces, interconnected where it could be and improved willy-nilly. It grew rather naturally. And it evolved into a behemoth that, yes, would not be manageable after a zombie apocalypse.
But, now we have this system and, fortunately or unfortunately, it will be easier to work with it to accomplish small changes (like a shift from fossils to renewables on the fuel input end of things) rather than scrap it for expensive individual islanding---even if that might help us in a possible REM “end of the world as we know it” scenario.
Even if we did island our house or our neighborhood with renewables, the only one you might be able to reproduce once the original equipment manufacturers (OEMS) are all dead and buried is a rough wind turbine or hydro wheel (if you're an engineer). It won’t be possible to replace that solar panel eventually broken in the zombie outbreak of 2024. And, so, we’d be stuck in the same boat as the characters in “The Walking Dead” finale---only we might be lamenting the lack of OEMS instead of our reliance on fossil fuels.
After all, we can’t put planning for a far-off “maybe” ahead of what works best at the moment. The zombies may come, but we in the power industry won’t be planning ahead for that specifically. Sorry hearty band of future survivors.
Sure, the CDC had back-up power when the first wave of zombies got tangled in distribution lines or gnawed through rural poles looking for tasty woodpeckers and took out part of the local grid. Like all major infrastructure points, they had generators. Big ones. But, two months into this new world, the generators were running out of fuel. There were no back-up options. All the back-up options (those generators) were too temporary to sustain the place for the apparently long-winded zombie overrun.
Even if there were more fuel for the generators, eventually, since fuel was no longer being made, even the last ones would sputter down and shut off. One of the characters comments that the power grid isn’t meant to run without fossil fuels. In fact, he laments, “Fossil fuels? How stupid were we?”
Actually, not that stupid.
Granted, the designers of the power grid didn’t think ahead to impending zombie horde takeover and how that would impact the system, but, sadly, even if today’s grid were run on wind energy, at some point a character in that story would have to comment, “Wind energy? How stupid were we?”
Because, it’s not about the fuel; it’s about the path.
The fact remains that the problem with our grid (were there to be a disastrous apocalypse of pretty much any type) is the system. It’s interconnected. It’s complicated. It’s tied from big generators (whether they are coal, natural gas, nukes or large wind farms) to end-users in a long stream of transmission lines, substations, ties, distribution lines, step-down transformers and meters---all of which are vulnerable and require oversight. Even if the fuel at the beginning of this chain were of a green variety, the way to plan ahead for power to aide a small band of survivors is not to change the fuel, it’s to also change the system. And that can’t really be done.
If you need to plan for small pockets of power to run individually, you have to island yourself, you have to isolate (either an area or a home) and figure out how to be your own system from fuel to use---the whole power cycle. You’d have to have renewables connected to your house (solar panels, wind turbines) and be able to use the flow directly. (And, of course, you’d have to have those renewables manufactured and installed pre-zombies, I’d imagine.)
In reality (and not on cable tv), it’s not practical to plan for the apocalypse. Instead, we plan for the most efficient system for the time (and for short outages when they happen). And, at the time the power grid was established, it was the most practical, pragmatic system. It got put together in bits and pieces, interconnected where it could be and improved willy-nilly. It grew rather naturally. And it evolved into a behemoth that, yes, would not be manageable after a zombie apocalypse.
But, now we have this system and, fortunately or unfortunately, it will be easier to work with it to accomplish small changes (like a shift from fossils to renewables on the fuel input end of things) rather than scrap it for expensive individual islanding---even if that might help us in a possible REM “end of the world as we know it” scenario.
Even if we did island our house or our neighborhood with renewables, the only one you might be able to reproduce once the original equipment manufacturers (OEMS) are all dead and buried is a rough wind turbine or hydro wheel (if you're an engineer). It won’t be possible to replace that solar panel eventually broken in the zombie outbreak of 2024. And, so, we’d be stuck in the same boat as the characters in “The Walking Dead” finale---only we might be lamenting the lack of OEMS instead of our reliance on fossil fuels.
After all, we can’t put planning for a far-off “maybe” ahead of what works best at the moment. The zombies may come, but we in the power industry won’t be planning ahead for that specifically. Sorry hearty band of future survivors.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Secretary Chu, Sputnik moments, growing up a little, and memories of the Fonz
In late November, Secretary Chu addressed the National Press Club and told Americans that we are immersed in a “Sputnik moment.”
What does that mean? Quite simply, Chu’s saying that we are chasing China and other nations in the area of clean technology and that this chase should clue us in that we need to buckle down and regain our technology foothold. It’s a wake up or shut up moment.
But, I don’t agree that we are in a fight-or-flight spot, a do-or-die situation. Instead, it feels more like a “jump the shark” moment to me.
To explain Chu’s scientific Sputnik reference let’s go back a generation to 1957 when Russia sent the sleeping giant of America a big ol’ wake up or shut up moment by launching the first Earth-orbiting, manmade satellite. U.S. citizens who saw America as the tech powerhouse in those post-war glory days were forced to alter those visions when it became obvious to the entire world that the Russians were ahead in this game. It was hard to ignore the shiny metal sphere circling the world. So, Sputnik 1’s launch created the space race and solidified the USSR as our biggest Cold War opponent. We took that as a call to a figurative tech war, and we met that call.
Now, Chu is telling us China’s our newest opponent, that it and other leaps-ahead clean and green industrial countries will be on the opposite side of what might be termed a “green war.”
“When it comes to innovation, Americans don't take a back seat to anyone---and we certainly won't start now," said Secretary Chu to the National Press Club. "From wind power to nuclear reactors to high speed rail, China and other countries are moving aggressively to capture the lead. Given that challenge, and given the enormous economic opportunities in clean energy, it's time for America to do what we do best: innovate. As President Obama has said, we should not, cannot, and will not play for second place."
I think Secretary Chu was being conservative when he told us we’re in a “Sputnik moment.” In the area of energy, Chu specifically pointed out China’s leaps in high voltage transmission, advanced coal tech, nuclear power and renewables. In his Sputnik moment world, we just need to try a little harder, and we’ll be back on top again.
Looking at all those clean tech issues and other countries’ (like numerous EU member states) pilot projects and funding, personally, I think, in the areas of green tech, we’re getting closer to a “jump the shark” moment.
To explain my “jump the shark” reference, think about the Fonz and all those good memories you had watching that classic TV favorite Happy Days. It was great family entertainment and often thoughtful and well written. But, all good things wind down if they don’t innovate and change. And, rather than innovating and changing, the Fonz (and Happy Days) chose a storyline where Henry Winkler’s leather-jacketed character (still in his leather jacket but also sporting board shorts) climbed onto water skis and literally jumped a shark to prove his manliness.
I’m not sure it really proved the Fonz’s manliness, if that was ever in question, but it did prove to many viewers that Happy Days really had nothing left to offer in terms of storylines and was headed downhill. And so “jumping the shark” became a familiar Hollywood idiom for TV shows that have lasted past their prime.
Has the concept of an American tech powerhouse also “jumped the shark”? Have we lasted past our “we’re number 1” prime? For years, countries that we have traditionally seen as “behind” in tech areas have assessed their situation, made changes and suddenly taken leaps ahead of us in niche areas. (Think of India’s large-and-in-charge acceptance of IEC 61850 as one example specific to our industry.)
I understand Chu’s desire to push the American button of competitiveness to re-energize the tech community, but I think it’s misguided and off the mark. There’s a lot of good work being done across the U.S. in clean tech areas. I doubt that what’s lacking here is really the technology itself or the thought leadership. It could, more specifically, be regulatory issues---lack of economic incentives, an inability to get states to work together on larger goals, issues with private and public access, the red tape.
So, standing up and declaring that we’re having a “Sputnik moment” to inspire us to get behind the development of better technology is an odd concept when that technology is already at hand (if not here, than in Germany or even, yes, China). Let’s accept that we’ve “jumped the shark” on being the number one worldwide techhead forever and ever and think more about the best way to move forward. Let’s think about collaboration and cooperation and less about, well, in a nutshell, proving our American “manliness” in the technology arena.
Let’s accept that we've jumped the shark, that we're no long numero uno. Even the Fonz’s Henry Winkler moved on eventually, expanding into production and directing his own shows, growing up a little and worrying less about that leather-jacketed image.
And let’s not start a green war where we work to come out on top again and line up opponents to knock down (or jump over or leap past) in an effort to make us shinier and newer with a $6 million makeover. Instead, can we all say, “You know what, winning isn’t the issue. And, we don’t need to ignite another 50-year international juggernaut.”
Instead, can we be adults about this and give China a quick phone call? Can we sit down for coffee with President Hu Jintao and ask the big questions, “How are those high voltage projects going? What advice would you have for us to implement similar changes?”
In other words, can we move this more global team forward together rather than re-establishing competitive lines set to mimic the problematic arc of the American-Russian space race?
It’s OK to have jumped the shark. It’s OK to be out-Sputniked by China. It’s OK to leave old animosities and fears and ethnocentric bubbles behind in the dust with our Cold War history and, instead, move forward to a clean tech future that’s more inclusive.
And, as every good American parent tells his child, it’s really OK to ask for help and a little advice when you need it.
What does that mean? Quite simply, Chu’s saying that we are chasing China and other nations in the area of clean technology and that this chase should clue us in that we need to buckle down and regain our technology foothold. It’s a wake up or shut up moment.
But, I don’t agree that we are in a fight-or-flight spot, a do-or-die situation. Instead, it feels more like a “jump the shark” moment to me.
To explain Chu’s scientific Sputnik reference let’s go back a generation to 1957 when Russia sent the sleeping giant of America a big ol’ wake up or shut up moment by launching the first Earth-orbiting, manmade satellite. U.S. citizens who saw America as the tech powerhouse in those post-war glory days were forced to alter those visions when it became obvious to the entire world that the Russians were ahead in this game. It was hard to ignore the shiny metal sphere circling the world. So, Sputnik 1’s launch created the space race and solidified the USSR as our biggest Cold War opponent. We took that as a call to a figurative tech war, and we met that call.
Now, Chu is telling us China’s our newest opponent, that it and other leaps-ahead clean and green industrial countries will be on the opposite side of what might be termed a “green war.”
“When it comes to innovation, Americans don't take a back seat to anyone---and we certainly won't start now," said Secretary Chu to the National Press Club. "From wind power to nuclear reactors to high speed rail, China and other countries are moving aggressively to capture the lead. Given that challenge, and given the enormous economic opportunities in clean energy, it's time for America to do what we do best: innovate. As President Obama has said, we should not, cannot, and will not play for second place."
I think Secretary Chu was being conservative when he told us we’re in a “Sputnik moment.” In the area of energy, Chu specifically pointed out China’s leaps in high voltage transmission, advanced coal tech, nuclear power and renewables. In his Sputnik moment world, we just need to try a little harder, and we’ll be back on top again.
Looking at all those clean tech issues and other countries’ (like numerous EU member states) pilot projects and funding, personally, I think, in the areas of green tech, we’re getting closer to a “jump the shark” moment.
To explain my “jump the shark” reference, think about the Fonz and all those good memories you had watching that classic TV favorite Happy Days. It was great family entertainment and often thoughtful and well written. But, all good things wind down if they don’t innovate and change. And, rather than innovating and changing, the Fonz (and Happy Days) chose a storyline where Henry Winkler’s leather-jacketed character (still in his leather jacket but also sporting board shorts) climbed onto water skis and literally jumped a shark to prove his manliness.
I’m not sure it really proved the Fonz’s manliness, if that was ever in question, but it did prove to many viewers that Happy Days really had nothing left to offer in terms of storylines and was headed downhill. And so “jumping the shark” became a familiar Hollywood idiom for TV shows that have lasted past their prime.
Has the concept of an American tech powerhouse also “jumped the shark”? Have we lasted past our “we’re number 1” prime? For years, countries that we have traditionally seen as “behind” in tech areas have assessed their situation, made changes and suddenly taken leaps ahead of us in niche areas. (Think of India’s large-and-in-charge acceptance of IEC 61850 as one example specific to our industry.)
I understand Chu’s desire to push the American button of competitiveness to re-energize the tech community, but I think it’s misguided and off the mark. There’s a lot of good work being done across the U.S. in clean tech areas. I doubt that what’s lacking here is really the technology itself or the thought leadership. It could, more specifically, be regulatory issues---lack of economic incentives, an inability to get states to work together on larger goals, issues with private and public access, the red tape.
So, standing up and declaring that we’re having a “Sputnik moment” to inspire us to get behind the development of better technology is an odd concept when that technology is already at hand (if not here, than in Germany or even, yes, China). Let’s accept that we’ve “jumped the shark” on being the number one worldwide techhead forever and ever and think more about the best way to move forward. Let’s think about collaboration and cooperation and less about, well, in a nutshell, proving our American “manliness” in the technology arena.
Let’s accept that we've jumped the shark, that we're no long numero uno. Even the Fonz’s Henry Winkler moved on eventually, expanding into production and directing his own shows, growing up a little and worrying less about that leather-jacketed image.
And let’s not start a green war where we work to come out on top again and line up opponents to knock down (or jump over or leap past) in an effort to make us shinier and newer with a $6 million makeover. Instead, can we all say, “You know what, winning isn’t the issue. And, we don’t need to ignite another 50-year international juggernaut.”
Instead, can we be adults about this and give China a quick phone call? Can we sit down for coffee with President Hu Jintao and ask the big questions, “How are those high voltage projects going? What advice would you have for us to implement similar changes?”
In other words, can we move this more global team forward together rather than re-establishing competitive lines set to mimic the problematic arc of the American-Russian space race?
It’s OK to have jumped the shark. It’s OK to be out-Sputniked by China. It’s OK to leave old animosities and fears and ethnocentric bubbles behind in the dust with our Cold War history and, instead, move forward to a clean tech future that’s more inclusive.
And, as every good American parent tells his child, it’s really OK to ask for help and a little advice when you need it.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Will there be an Erin Brockovich 2: Back to Hinkley?
We all saw the original. Julia Roberts even won an Oscar. Now, it seems the story isn’t over.
Original long story short (and basic facts courtesy of the local Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board): California utility Pacific Gas and Electric (PG and E) has a compressor station about two miles outside of the small town of Hinkley, California. It’s out in the Mojave Desert, quite a long way from anything (except Hinkey and Barstow, a couple of the handful of bits of civilization out in the flat California heat).
Between 1952 and 1966, PG and E used hexavalent chromium (hex chrome or chromium 6) to fight corrosion in cooling towers, and the wastewater from those cooling towers was flushed into unlined ponds at the site. Some of the wastewater seeped into the local groundwater, resulting in chromium 6 popping up in local wells. (Hex chrome is a heavy metal and can occur naturally in small amounts, but its major source is industrial waste.)
If you’ve seen the award-winning Steven Soderbergh film, you know there were a lot of illnesses and medical issues in and around Hinkley eventually linked to the chromium 6 pollution through class-action litigation. A $300-million-plus settlement was awarded from PG and E to residents, and the utility promised to contain the “plume” of hexavelent chromium to keep it from spreading.
Unfortunately, earlier this year, the water board found, through testing, that the plume continues to expand despite efforts by the utility to keep it in check, and the board recently asked PG and E to do more to contain the spread and assist the town. In November, PG and E distributed drinking water to residents and, late in the month, proposed buying nearly 100 impacted properties in the area.
PG and E has reiterated that it is committed to cleaning up Hinkley but that such projects take time. It has also noted in articles and releases that some areas recently reported as contaminated are still within the California safe drinking standard.
This Hinkley/PG and E sequel is getting international attention. Yesterday (December 1), London’s Guardian reported that the local water board in the area “ordered” PG and E to reduce the chromium 6 level to 3.1 parts per billion. (The state standard is 50 micrograms per liter maximum contaminant level for drinking water). The newspaper also noted that PG and E’s own study concluded that “natural attenuation”---basically allowing nature to fix it without humans mucking it up too much---could take 1,000 years. (Although, to be fair, that September PG and E feasibility study had a number of different clean-up options; natural attenuation wasn’t the suggested option for clean-up but more of a reference point.) Still, it’s likely that the utility will, indeed, have to roll up their sleeves a bit more and get back their hands back into the Hinkley water supply.
The PR in this situation is tricky. The 2000 flick has “made truth,” to an extent, the dramatized version of this long and complicated (and unfortunate) story. PG and E will always have to contend with being cast as the heavy in this situation, and even proactive action---like the letters to residents offering potential buyouts---will naturally be regarded with suspicion given the cinematic and legal history. But, the alternative---a PR bit of that “natural attenuation” equivalent to, basically, ignoring the stories being created for this new Hinkley sequel---is not possible.
What’s safe and fair in this current chromium 6 situation is best left to the water board, with citizen input, to define. All we, and Pacific Gas and Electric, can do at this point is wait, and listen.
Sometimes really listening---making listening an activity unto itself---is the best place to start.
There was a meeting about this issue last night at the Hinkley elementary school. Everyone from the water board to Brockovich herself was expected to attend. The board and the attendees were set to discuss all the clean-up options PG and E listed in their study.
Cross your fingers that there was active listening on all sides of this issue and that a plan for progress came out of what must have been an emotional, turbulent meeting.
And let’s all hope that a storyline for a dramatic movie sequel isn’t unfolding before us and that, instead, it will be a boring and quiet little tale of a community and a utility actively working together to get a small, proud California town back to normal as quickly as possible.
Original long story short (and basic facts courtesy of the local Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board): California utility Pacific Gas and Electric (PG and E) has a compressor station about two miles outside of the small town of Hinkley, California. It’s out in the Mojave Desert, quite a long way from anything (except Hinkey and Barstow, a couple of the handful of bits of civilization out in the flat California heat).
Between 1952 and 1966, PG and E used hexavalent chromium (hex chrome or chromium 6) to fight corrosion in cooling towers, and the wastewater from those cooling towers was flushed into unlined ponds at the site. Some of the wastewater seeped into the local groundwater, resulting in chromium 6 popping up in local wells. (Hex chrome is a heavy metal and can occur naturally in small amounts, but its major source is industrial waste.)
If you’ve seen the award-winning Steven Soderbergh film, you know there were a lot of illnesses and medical issues in and around Hinkley eventually linked to the chromium 6 pollution through class-action litigation. A $300-million-plus settlement was awarded from PG and E to residents, and the utility promised to contain the “plume” of hexavelent chromium to keep it from spreading.
Unfortunately, earlier this year, the water board found, through testing, that the plume continues to expand despite efforts by the utility to keep it in check, and the board recently asked PG and E to do more to contain the spread and assist the town. In November, PG and E distributed drinking water to residents and, late in the month, proposed buying nearly 100 impacted properties in the area.
PG and E has reiterated that it is committed to cleaning up Hinkley but that such projects take time. It has also noted in articles and releases that some areas recently reported as contaminated are still within the California safe drinking standard.
This Hinkley/PG and E sequel is getting international attention. Yesterday (December 1), London’s Guardian reported that the local water board in the area “ordered” PG and E to reduce the chromium 6 level to 3.1 parts per billion. (The state standard is 50 micrograms per liter maximum contaminant level for drinking water). The newspaper also noted that PG and E’s own study concluded that “natural attenuation”---basically allowing nature to fix it without humans mucking it up too much---could take 1,000 years. (Although, to be fair, that September PG and E feasibility study had a number of different clean-up options; natural attenuation wasn’t the suggested option for clean-up but more of a reference point.) Still, it’s likely that the utility will, indeed, have to roll up their sleeves a bit more and get back their hands back into the Hinkley water supply.
The PR in this situation is tricky. The 2000 flick has “made truth,” to an extent, the dramatized version of this long and complicated (and unfortunate) story. PG and E will always have to contend with being cast as the heavy in this situation, and even proactive action---like the letters to residents offering potential buyouts---will naturally be regarded with suspicion given the cinematic and legal history. But, the alternative---a PR bit of that “natural attenuation” equivalent to, basically, ignoring the stories being created for this new Hinkley sequel---is not possible.
What’s safe and fair in this current chromium 6 situation is best left to the water board, with citizen input, to define. All we, and Pacific Gas and Electric, can do at this point is wait, and listen.
Sometimes really listening---making listening an activity unto itself---is the best place to start.
There was a meeting about this issue last night at the Hinkley elementary school. Everyone from the water board to Brockovich herself was expected to attend. The board and the attendees were set to discuss all the clean-up options PG and E listed in their study.
Cross your fingers that there was active listening on all sides of this issue and that a plan for progress came out of what must have been an emotional, turbulent meeting.
And let’s all hope that a storyline for a dramatic movie sequel isn’t unfolding before us and that, instead, it will be a boring and quiet little tale of a community and a utility actively working together to get a small, proud California town back to normal as quickly as possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
