Utilities, we need to talk.

Is fully free, clean and reliable power really too much to ask?

Robert Brook

Utilities are persistently, conspicuously absent from the typical list of public servants we uphold and praise in the U.S. Teachers educate our children, medical professionals keep us healthy, and first responders see us through emergencies. Utilities keep the lights on so we can do everything, yet you, utilities, are not just left out of this group. Despite your herculean efforts to keep power online in the face of unprecedented challenges, you’re often vilified or blamed.??

You catch a lot of heat (pun intended) for events not always directly under your control, like the marked increase in severe weather due to climate change in recent decades. You’re also forced to navigate immense complexity (looking at you, regulators), and respond to the myriad concerns of a huge number of stakeholders without the resources to really address each problem at hand. Worse, you want the same energy transition we do, but we don’t want the necessary wind and solar projects, or gasp, transmission towers, to spoil our views or property values. Ultimately, our expectations of you are incredibly high (we’d all love free, clean power that’s 100% online, all the time!), and you have 100 problems to address at any given moment, but can only reasonably take on 10 given financial and logistical limitations. That’s a tough spot to be in.?

All that said, we are all –– and by we, I do mean all of us: consumers, legislators and regulators, and the private sector –– in a very long-term, very committed relationship from which there’s no possibility of breakup or divorce. We are bound to our utility providers.

It’s completely natural that in such a long-term relationship, needs change and priorities shift over time, but in order for this to be a happy, successful partnership going forward, I think it’s time we sit down, dear utilities, and have a tough conversation.?

Worth saying too that I have so much empathy for the challenges you face — during my time at PG&E, I faced those same challenges as we responded to the San Bruno explosion, which helped set the stage for a paradigm shift in our expectations of you. Now that I have the privilege of being on the outside looking in, here are some steps we can take to get back on the same page.?

Let’s be honest

It’s pretty human to bury one’s head in the sand and only address potential issues until they hit their crescendo and can no longer be ignored. We’re busy, overworked, and exhausted, so we often do what we can and leave other non-urgent problems for another day. This is even more true for utilities, as you suffer from a "see no evil" dynamic where you’re truly obligated to do something about risks that come to your attention, thanks to regulation. But when you don’t have the resources to address risks in the way regulation dictates, it makes it even more tempting to remain blissfully unaware of risks altogether. As a result, we’re left in a vicious cycle, where we respond only to the most pressing needs, and have no time or energy to get proactive about issues that might rear their head tomorrow.?

To get out of the cycle, let's acknowledge our strengths and weaknesses objectively. Say you spent seven figures on poles that didn't really need to be replaced, could that have gone another way if you knew which ones actually need replacement? Or if you knew where pole wrapping or line tightening would have sufficed instead of spending the big bucks on a wholesale replacement at the 11th hour??

We’ve also grown complacent waiting for new transmission to bring clean energy online, but do we really need to?? What if we could get more mileage from the assets we already have? We might be able to accomplish some meaningful progress together on our asks if you’re able to get transparent, so we can get ahead of issues instead of staying reactive. The only thing more overwhelming than documenting more risks or maintenance needs at a time is waiting for them to sneak up on you with hefty fines and often, much worse.??

Plus, you’ll have more control than ever in how you’re able to prioritize risks and budget accordingly. It’s the key to more proactive operations and staying out of the hot seat.?

Let’s figure out together what we actually want

It seems like when it comes to prioritization, you can’t see the forest for the trees, and not just literally (that’s a vegetation mitigation joke). There’s a tendency to focus on political projects, or the most pressing short-term goal, rather than take on the big meaty problems that could have real, meaningful, long-term impacts. For example, we’re seeing utilities install weather sensors for a more up-to-the minute read on weather conditions so they can respond faster as severe weather unfolds. Not a bad idea at all. But I’ll raise you one better — how about modeling weather scenarios from soup to nuts (like using micro-climatology) before the weather arrives? Yes, this would require more resources and effective prioritization, but it would dramatically speed up response times, and provide the ability to get more proactive — and isn’t that what we all want?

Some of this is a result of legacy structures and processes, and that’s not all on you. It’s not unusual that utilities are required to answer more than 100 questions per pole in some types of inspections. It’s easy to see how that might disincentivize inspections unless or until they’re absolutely necessary. So sure, it can be easier to plow ahead and do what you can within the constraints of existing systems and adhere to processes, instead of looking for real fixes or trying to push back on regulators. Another constraint is of course financial, but the cheapest answer is rarely the best.

But imagine what might happen if you did look at problems head-on, prioritized effectively, and made investments where it makes sense? Patti Poppe of Pacific Gas and Electric Company is a strong example of this in action. Ahead of PG&E’s 2023 Innovation Challenge, the company did a thorough internal exploration of the problems they wanted to solve –– and then invited startups and other innovators to help them work towards solutions. It’s certainly a step in the right direction.?

Let’s communicate more, and better

Ultimately, what we’re looking for is a two-way conversation. For consumers, we want more insight into how you’re going to address our concerns, but what we often get instead is just what it’s going to cost. That’s a conversation-stopper for sure. Regulators, too, need an open invitation to see what’s working and what’s not in order to be able to understand and effectively address where they’re getting it right, and where they’re getting it not-so-right. Transparency opens the door, and allows everyone involved to be able to take an active role in working together toward progress.?

Speaking of progress, a better two-way conversation with tech companies is another huge area of opportunity. Right now, when you release an RFP, you’re crafting the response you want, rather than allowing us to come to the table with creative, truly innovative solutions. If instead, you communicate your goals, without dictating how we might help you achieve them, we’ll be in a stronger position to work toward them alongside you.?

So, dear utilities, all we really want and need from you is what we’d expect from any committed partner. A little more honesty, a stronger sense of what our shared future can and should look like, and a more open conversation so we can get there together.?

It’s true that we can’t break up, but we also don’t want to. Let’s make this work.?