The Electric Grid Is a Wildfire Hazard. It Doesn’t Have to Be.

One year after the deadly wildfires on Maui and a few weeks after Hurricane Beryl knocked out power to millions of Houston-area residents, it has become abundantly clear that our electricity grid is dangerously vulnerable.

The accumulating wear and tear on the components that hold the grid together, combined with weather that has often been hotter and stormier in some regions, means the wildfires and sustained blackouts may be a preview of how an aging grid could falter spectacularly as weather becomes more extreme and demand for electricity continues to rise.

The National Academy of Engineering calls the power grid the most important innovation of the 20th century, and with the greater electrification of society it will become even more critical. The sprawling system of transmission lines, power plants and transformers connects communities across the United States. Many of the components that tie the system together — utility poles, transmission towers and power lines — haven’t been modernized or upgraded since they were built, often decades ago. The consequences of this neglect, as we have seen, can be catastrophic.

This past spring, a decayed utility pole broke in high winds in the Texas Panhandle, causing power wires to fall on dry grass and igniting the largest fire in the state’s history. Two people died and more than one million acres burned. The Maui wildfire that killed more than 100 people and destroyed the historic town of Lahaina last year began after winds knocked down power lines, also igniting dry grass. The 2018 Paradise fire in California started when a live wire broke free of a tower that was a quarter-century past what the utility Pacific Gas & Electric considered its “useful life.” Eighty-five people died and nearly 14,000 homes were destroyed.

Maintenance budgets for the grid have been insufficient for decades. Solutions exist to reduce the risk of wildfires, such as burying power lines, inspecting every mile of the system, installing modern sensors for early detection of wildfire risk, and controls that allow for the remote disconnection of vulnerable sections of the grid. Granted, these fixes are expensive. To bury transmission lines can easily cost $3 million to $5 million a mile. But research from Lawrence Berkeley National Lab concluded that these overhauls also save money in lives protected and damage avoided in storm-prone areas.

So why haven’t made these investments been made?

State regulators overseeing electric utilities pressure them to keep rates low, which means smaller budgets for trimming trees, modernizing lines or deploying autonomous inspection technologies. Regulators in California recently scaled back Pacific Gas & Electric’s plan to bury 10,000 miles of transmission lines in fire- prone areas. In Texas, regulators have few wildfire regulations for the power sector.

Shareholder pressure on electric utilities has prioritized profits over maintenance that can help reduce wildfire risk. This deferred maintenance over the decades means old frail utility poles are more likely to fall and outdated, weakened wires are more apt to snap during storms. Risk-averse utilities can raise risks by steering clear of innovative technologies that might be beneficial. Private utilities provide a significant portion of the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity across the grid.

Worst of all, it seems the nation is still in deep denial about climate change. A hotter, drier climate in the Mountain West means that our abundant forests and grasslands are a tinderbox waiting to ignite.

Acres burned by wildfire in the United States have increased by about 50 percent over the past 20 years as climate change extends the duration of fire season. The federal government’s National Climate Assessment concluded that larger and more severe wildfires in the West are likely. But it’s not just the Mountain West that is at risk. Coasts could see more frequent and intense hurricanes. And much of the country may experience more frequent tornadoes, which can also knock down utility lines.

The grid needs to double, triple or even quadruple its capacity to deliver electricity by about 2050 to meet growing demand for new data centers, factories and electric vehicles. Making it bigger without improving it would only compound the fire risk.

The federal government should sponsor more research and development into wildfire safety, including better weather forecasting to fine-tune our understanding of the timing and location of risks. Utilities should use real-time monitoring of grid components to detect fallen power lines, broken devices or overloaded equipment that can spark; and better control of electric circuits so power to downed wires can be cut off remotely.

Utilities can take advantage of federal funding in the Inflation Reduction Act to decarbonize the grid and make it safer. Billions of dollars have been made available to upgrade the grid, in part by replacing older power lines with stronger ones that can carry more electricity. Utilities will be able to connect to more wind and solar power generators in remote locations while improving overall reliability. Old poles should be replaced with ones made of stronger, composite materials.

Allowing utilities to bury their lines underground in areas that are fire-prone or experience extreme weather would sharply reduce risks of fire and power outages. Regulators and shareholders often balk at the price, but this is a cost of doing business these days. Utilities should also clear vegetation consistently and aggressively along the corridors that carry their big transmission lines and local distribution lines. Neighborhoods might not like the way trimmed trees look, but they will like the look of charred houses even less.

More contingency planning will also help strengthen the grid and minimize the impact when lines are downed. Microgrids, which the fund I work with has invested in, are one example. These small, self-contained networks can provide electricity powered by natural gas or solar energy with batteries to large buildings or even a campus. They can operate on their own, or connect to a larger grid, and can provide electricity to communities, hospitals and grocery stores even when power lines operated by the big utilities are turned off because the risk of fire is high.

Lastly, let’s quit pretending climate change isn’t happening or is not as serious as it really is. Insurance companies are raising premiums to reflect those climate risks. Fire danger has already made parts of California essentially uninsurable. Ultimately, it will be cheaper if taxpayers, electricity consumers and shareholders of private utilities rebuild the grid for the weather of the future rather than picking up the tab for expensive failures of the grid built for the weather of the past.

Michael E. Webber is a professor of public affairs and engineering at the University of Texas and the chief technology officer of Energy Impact Partners, a venture fund that has investments in technologies to improve the electrical grid. He is a former chief science and technology officer for ENGIE, a publicly traded electricity company in France.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected].

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, X and Threads.