Power failures awaiting legislative response
When the power goes out, especially for an extended period, there’s no greater crisis. Everyone wants to talk about reforming our utilities and ensuring such a failure never happens again. But as soon as the lights come back on, attention quickly moves elsewhere.
That’s no surprise; people have a limited capacity to focus. But the problems surrounding Tropical Storm Isaias last year were so severe — with power out for days in the heat of summer in the middle of a pandemic — that attention has lingered, and some in a position of power have shown a lasting interest in reform. The state is going to find out how far that zeal will go.
State utility regulators have had their say. In a recent report, the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority said Eversource and United Illuminating, which together provide power to almost the entire state, failed to fully prepare for and respond to Isaias. PURA reduced the companies’ ability to recoup costs related to the storm, potentially costing them millions of dollars.
That’s a good start. It shouldn’t be the last word. Connecticut has a system no one would ever think to design. Eversource and UI are private companies with stockholders, share prices and year-end bonuses. But power distribution is by definition a monopoly. It’s not as if some competitor can come in and string up wires to every house in the state in a bid to offer a better service. There is a market in power production, but when it comes to keeping the lights on, these companies have the final say.
This is a product of deregulation, which swept Connecticut and the nation a generation ago on the theory that anything government can do, the private sector can do better. But while that may make sense in certain sectors, the provision of a service on which everyone relies — such as lights that turn on when they’re supposed to — does not fall into that category.
In fact, the few towns in Connecticut that retained publicly run power distribution reported much better records in turning the power back on last year than the two dominant companies. Could this model once again work for the rest of the state?
It comes down to costs. Eversource relies on a model where staffing levels are far lower than they were in previous decades, meaning there are fewer people to pay on a regular basis. But when crisis strikes, the company relies on out-of-state help to restore power, and that can take days to bring together, especially if nearby states are in a similar crisis. Keeping a regular staff on hand to deal with serious problems costs more, but it means the power comes back on sooner.
The Legislature made a lot of noise last year about taking on these questions, but there has been little indication a major reform is in the works. With only a few weeks left in the session, time is short to take on a nettlesome challenge.
Lawmakers need to act. The current system is unsustainable and due for reform. It shouldn’t take another weeklong failure to spur action.
PURA reduced the companies’ ability to recoup costs related to the storm, potentially costing them millions of dollars. That’s a good start. It shouldn’t be the last word.