On January 7, fierce winds swept through the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains, prompting residents in Altadena to urgently contact Southern California Edison (SCE) to request a power shutdown to prevent potential wildfires. Just after 6 p.m., a fire was reported beneath an Edison transmission tower in Eaton Canyon, raising serious concerns about the utility’s equipment and its possible role in igniting a blaze that ultimately destroyed over 9,000 structures and claimed 17 lives.
While the precise cause of the fire is still under investigation, evidence has emerged suggesting that SCE’s equipment may have contributed to the disaster. The company acknowledged that its power lines in the Eaton Canyon area experienced a momentary surge in electrical current coinciding with the fire’s onset. This has led to significant scrutiny from investigators and experts alike regarding the utility’s decision-making process and its failure to preemptively cut power in the area.
Public records obtained by The Times reveal that SCE had been warned about the risks associated with power shutdowns, including the possibility of overloading other transmission lines, which could lead to overheating and sparks. Despite this knowledge, the utility reportedly delayed necessary upgrades designed to mitigate these risks, leaving critical work incomplete.
Kathleen Dunleavy, a spokeswoman for SCE, urged caution against jumping to conclusions about the fire’s origin. She emphasized that the utility is exploring all potential causes, including the involvement of its equipment. Dunleavy stated, "We don’t know what caused the Eaton fire," highlighting the uncertainty surrounding the incident.
The California Independent System Operator (CAISO) had previously conducted studies indicating that cutting power to certain lines could lead to a surge of 900 to 1,000 megawatts on remaining energized lines. Such surges could cause transmission lines to sag, arc, and possibly ignite fires. Attorneys representing fire victims have proposed a theory that an idle tower in the canyon may have unexpectedly re-energized, potentially triggering the fire.
Despite the warnings, SCE opted to cut power to only a limited number of lower-capacity distribution lines, leaving larger transmission lines active until after the fire had begun. Robert McCullough, an energy analyst, noted that the utility had been cautioned about the consequences of de-energizing lines under such conditions, which could lead to catastrophic failures.
Experts have pointed out that the utility had options available to manage the risks associated with power outages. A 2022 CAISO presentation suggested that keeping electricity flowing through the transmission system could significantly reduce the risk of overloading and subsequent fires. However, SCE’s decision-making protocols, which are governed by the California Public Utilities Commission, did not prompt a preemptive shutdown based on the wind conditions at the time.
As investigations continue, more than 40 lawsuits have been filed against SCE, with legal representatives scrutinizing the utility’s actions leading up to the fire. The records obtained may provide crucial insights into the decisions made by SCE and the potential accountability for the devastating impact of the Eaton fire.
The ongoing analysis of this incident underscores the critical balance utilities must strike between maintaining service and ensuring public safety during extreme weather events. The stakes are high, as mistakes in such scenarios can have catastrophic consequences for communities and the environment.