Town Square

Post a New Topic

Power surge pops lights, televisions

Original post made on Aug 26, 2011

Television sets and lights popped and and blew out in two East Palo Alto neighborhoods after a power surge on Thursday (Aug. 25) night.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, August 25, 2011, 11:22 PM

Comments (8)

Like this comment
Posted by Bright spot somewhere!
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Aug 26, 2011 at 6:44 am


Like this comment
Posted by PG&E
a resident of Monroe Park
on Aug 26, 2011 at 7:00 am

Good excuse for PG&E to make money and update old equipment and set to surcharge...nice...Capitalism at its best

Like this comment
Posted by JustMe
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Aug 26, 2011 at 12:16 pm

400VAC is a very healthy dose of electricity. I wonder if the old mechanical meters would have suffered like those smart meters did.

PG&E (poster), that handle is very misleading, and I seriously douby PG&E ( the REAL company) will profit from this episode. They will have to start with replacing all those meters, and then they will have to deal with the costs of the damage THEIR surge created. Looking at the meteal boxes behind the blown-out smart meters, plus the way it was caused by "a burned out wire", they might be due for an infrastructure upgrade too. It's going to cost them.

Like this comment
Posted by Mutti
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Aug 26, 2011 at 1:28 pm

Biggest problem was that power was out to the Ravenswood City School District offices on East Bayshore, 1 block north of University. The e-mail, phones and computer networks were all down. Surge protectors on the servers, etc, protected the equipment from permanent harm, but back-up batteries don't last 12 hours. Schools had to start this morning with no phones or computers. All the school sites had power, but phones and network come through the Central office.

Like this comment
Posted by car o.
a resident of Fairmeadow
on Aug 26, 2011 at 2:28 pm

[Post removed due to same poster using multiple names]

Like this comment
Posted by JustMe
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Aug 26, 2011 at 4:18 pm

Oops, sorry. The story got edited since my last post, now it was 40000 VAC that was sent to the houses. That's nasty, very nasty. This, like the little episode with the gas pipeline in San Bruno, is why PG&E needs to keep their infrastructure maintained. Thankfully the damage was not that bad this time, apparently.

Like this comment
Posted by do I need to look further?
a resident of Green Acres
on Aug 27, 2011 at 8:35 pm

Well, that's really interesting. Because my old trusty television burned out the same time and we smelled smoke that smelled like electrical smoke but couldn't figure it out. We've replaced the TV with one someone else was getting rid of, but now I'm wondering if I need to otherwise check electrical safety in the house. Was Palo Alto affected at all?

Like this comment
Posted by Carlito Waysman
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Aug 28, 2011 at 12:03 pm

So much for the so called "smart" meters that can not handle a power surge, the "bright " minds who designed this contraption did not think about it, or thought that the chances of a power surge were so remote that they did not bother to include a safety feature to neutralize a surge.

Because PGE was pushing their users to accept this new meters, is PGE going to pay for any damage a home or apartment suffered in their electrical wiring, due to the power surge?

Or as usual, will they pass the cost to all their users in the form of a surcharge, as they intend to do with the San Bruno pipeline explosion financial costs?

Who said that there are enough regulations on big business already?

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Coffeebar opens in Menlo Park
By Elena Kadvany | 2 comments | 5,021 views

Spring College Fairs
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 733 views

Couples: So You Married Mom or Dad . . .
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 723 views

Stanford's Assistive Technology Class Open to All Starts 1/9/2018
By Max Greenberg | 0 comments | 547 views