As Los Angeles County grapples with the aftermath of devastating wildfires and the ongoing challenge of infrastructure resilience, we sat down with Christopher Hailstone, a seasoned expert in energy management and utilities. With his deep knowledge of grid reliability, renewable energy, and electricity delivery, Christopher offers a unique perspective on the county’s ambitious push to move power lines and other infrastructure underground. In this interview, we explore the motivations behind this initiative, the benefits and challenges of undergrounding, the progress made so far, and the broader implications for public safety and community well-being.
What sparked Los Angeles County’s current drive to move power lines and infrastructure underground?
The recent wildfires in West L.A. County were a major wake-up call. These fires destroyed vast areas, and during the rebuilding process, officials saw a critical window to rethink how infrastructure is managed. Exposed power lines have long been a risk factor for sparking fires, especially in high-wind conditions, and they’ve also proven vulnerable to damage. The idea is to use this rebuilding phase as an opportunity to create a safer, more durable system by burying these lines, rather than just putting things back the way they were.
How do these devastating wildfires tie into the urgency of this initiative?
Wildfires, like the ones we saw in January, often exacerbate the dangers of above-ground power lines. When lines are knocked down by wind or debris, they can ignite dry brush and start new fires. Plus, during emergencies, fallen poles and wires can block roads, making evacuation nearly impossible. County officials are looking at these events and saying, ‘We can’t afford to keep repeating the same mistakes.’ The destruction caused by these fires has really underscored the need for a more resilient infrastructure.
In what ways does undergrounding power lines contribute to saving lives and improving safety?
Burying power lines directly reduces the risk of fires caused by downed wires, which is a huge safety win in fire-prone areas. Beyond that, it minimizes the chance of live wires blocking evacuation routes during a crisis, which can be a matter of life and death. As Supervisor Lindsey Horvath has pointed out, undergrounding isn’t just about preventing disasters—it’s about ensuring people can get out safely when disaster strikes. It’s a proactive step to protect communities, especially in areas vulnerable to natural disasters.
Can you elaborate on how undergrounding enhances the resilience of communication and road systems?
Absolutely. When power lines and communication cables are underground, they’re shielded from weather events like storms or high winds that can knock down poles. This means fewer outages and more reliable communication during emergencies, which is critical for coordinating response efforts. As Mark Pestrella from L.A. County Public Works has noted, it also ties into road systems—without fallen poles or wires cluttering evacuation routes, roads remain accessible. It creates a more integrated, dependable network that holds up under pressure.
What can you tell us about the progress Southern California Edison has made with this undergrounding effort?
Southern California Edison has been making significant strides. They’re currently working on moving about 40 miles of electrical lines underground, focusing on high-risk and heavily impacted areas like Topanga Canyon, Rambla Pacifico, and along the Pacific Coast Highway. They’ve also extended efforts to places like Altadena. It’s a big undertaking, but it shows a commitment to reducing fire risks and improving reliability in some of the county’s most vulnerable spots.
Why are some telecommunications companies hesitant to join in on undergrounding their equipment?
There’s a bit of a standoff happening here. Many telecom companies share poles with power providers under joint agreements, and they’re balking at the cost and logistical challenges of moving their equipment underground. It’s a pricey endeavor, and they’re likely weighing the immediate financial burden against long-term benefits. Some may also argue that their systems aren’t as directly tied to fire risks as power lines are, so they don’t see the same urgency. This resistance creates a real hurdle for fully clearing shared poles.
How does the refusal of telecom companies affect the broader goals of this initiative?
It’s a significant roadblock. Even if Southern California Edison moves its lines underground, the shared poles can’t be removed unless all parties agree to relocate their equipment. As Supervisor Horvath has pointed out, this means unsightly and potentially hazardous poles remain standing, undermining the aesthetic and safety goals of undergrounding. It slows down the process and creates a patchwork system that’s less effective than a fully coordinated effort would be.
What lessons from past disasters, like the 2018 Camp Fire in Paradise, are influencing L.A. County’s approach now?
The Camp Fire was a tragic lesson in the dangers of above-ground infrastructure. In Paradise, downed poles and wires not only contributed to the fire’s spread but also blocked evacuation routes, trapping residents and hindering emergency response. L.A. County officials are taking those events to heart, recognizing that similar conditions—dry landscapes, high winds, and dense populations—exist here. They’re using that disaster as a blueprint for what not to repeat, pushing hard for undergrounding to prevent history from repeating itself.
How do the costs of undergrounding stack up against maintaining above-ground lines, and why is there such a difference?
Upfront, undergrounding is much more expensive. Digging trenches, laying cables, and ensuring proper insulation and access for maintenance all add up quickly. It’s a labor-intensive process compared to stringing lines on poles. However, over the long haul, underground systems can save money by reducing repair costs from weather damage or fire-related incidents. Residents like Max Alperstein in Rambla Pacifico also point out benefits like fewer service disruptions and even better aesthetics, which add value in ways that are harder to quantify.
What’s your forecast for the future of infrastructure resilience in Los Angeles County as this undergrounding effort continues?
I’m cautiously optimistic. If L.A. County can navigate the challenges with telecom companies and secure the necessary funding, undergrounding could set a powerful precedent for other regions. We’re likely to see a gradual shift toward more resilient systems, especially in high-risk areas, but it won’t happen overnight. The push to work with regulatory bodies like the California Public Utilities Commission shows determination, and I think we’ll see incremental progress over the next decade. The bigger question is whether public and private stakeholders can align their priorities to make this a widespread reality.
