# What does YOUR state do??



## masterspark (Sep 2, 2012)

x


----------



## camo2460 (Feb 10, 2013)

I don't know much about Missouri's emergency plan but Camden County's plan sucks. I know of a person, a friend of mine who died of a heart attack due to poor planning on the part of the county, during a severe snow storm. Also during a very bad ice storm a few years back, I know of people who had no electricity for more than six weeks due to bad planning and a lack of being prepared on the county's part, but in all fairness these people were also very unprepared as well.


----------



## cnsper (Sep 20, 2012)

How was bad planning on the gov'ts part the fault for no electricity? Is that not the responsibility of the power company? Gov't can't and should not be responsible for everything.


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

cnsper said:


> How was bad planning on the gov'ts part the fault for no electricity? Is that not the responsibility of the power company? Gov't can't and should not be responsible for everything.


Agreed. And how is it the county's fault for the snow storm?


----------



## dixiemama (Nov 28, 2012)

Kentucky doesn't have a plan per se state wide. Floyd country has sirens that are tested monthly, a swift water rescue squad, and every little town has a fire house who trains regularly.


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

IMHO, the worst plan is to depend on someone else's plan whether it be the government's, Grandma's, the neighbors, etc.

Unprepared: Hi, lucky you...I'm here. Feed me clothe me, shelter me... and my family, dogs, cats, and goldfish.
Unlucky person: What did you bring with you?
Unprepared: Me, family, pets.
Unlucky person: I meant food.
Unprepared: Food... I didn't have time to go the store. I'm just lucky we were able to get here at all.
and the story line goes on and on and on.....


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

cnsper said:


> How was bad planning on the gov'ts part the fault for no electricity? Is that not the responsibility of the power company? Gov't can't and should not be responsible for everything.


Utilities are very heavily regulated, including the setting of rates and the amount that can be spent on capital improvements or maintenance.

With that regulation comes responsibility. Here in NJ we obviously need a major effort to move lines from above ground to underground. Between the cost, need to dig up rights of way, and other factors, this is for all practical purposes a government decision.


----------



## Reblazed (Nov 11, 2010)

Geek999 said:


> With that regulation comes responsibility.


Sorry, Geek. You know better than to even THINK you can justify that way of thinking ( handing off personal responsibility to another) on this forum. 

just my opinion

.


----------



## BillS (May 30, 2011)

Reblazed said:


> Sorry, Geek. You know better than to even THINK you can justify that way of thinking ( handing off personal responsibility to another) on this forum.
> 
> just my opinion
> 
> .


The government is responsible when they cripple the private sector. Such as power generation in California. There hasn't been a new power plant in years. The state of California is responsible for the lack of power generation in the state.


----------



## dutch9mm (Jul 29, 2013)

Country Living said:


> IMHO, the worst plan is to depend on someone else's plan whether it be the government's, Grandma's, the neighbors, etc.
> 
> Unprepared: Hi, lucky you...I'm here. Feed me clothe me, shelter me... and my family, dogs, cats, and goldfish.
> Unlucky person: What did you bring with you?
> ...


Welcome unlucky person here's some tools this is what needs to be done you and whomever you've brought get to it.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

masterspark said:


> Every state has an emergency preparedness plan....What does YOUR state do??


I have never concerned myself with what the states thinks/does. In/after a disaster, we'll do just fine on our own.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

masterspark said:


> :gaah:OK so this thread went waaay offtrack. I was trying to be constructive by showing that at least the state was recomending to store a weeks worth of food, water, meds, etc. Aint much, but it's something.
> All I get is everyone ranting to not trust the govt.......a totally different arguement.
> Try to see the sunny side folks, someone who reads the state info may actually take prepping seroiusly like ya'll.


You're correct that a week recommendation is better than a 3 day recommendation. On the other hand, the only folks on a forum like this one (there are others) are likely to be well past that point.

As for trusting the government, the screw ups during simple disasters like Katrina are a big part of what led us to start prepping for ourselves. I live in an area affected by Sandy. If the response was better than Katrina, it sure wasn't obvious.


----------



## k0xxx (Oct 27, 2011)

Most people don't want to concern themselves with emergency plans and only complain when they are affected by an emergency and they miss the latest Dancing With the Kardashians, or some [email protected] like that.

Government disaster response starts at the local level, and only moves upward in jurisdictions only as additional resources are needed. Once City government is overwhelmed, additional help the comes from the County, then the State, then Federal. The state of Arkansas has a very good emergency plan and it has proved it's worth several times over the last ten years that I've been involved in emergency response. We also have a state wide communication grid, and it is backed up by an impressive network of Amateur Radio operators.

The state of Arkansas perform SET's (Simulated Emergency Tests) at least once per year on a state level, and participates in regional level tests. Their plan is also available for viewing and downloading on the internet.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

That sounds really positive up to the AR state level. Since there are still folks here who are struggling with the state, I can't say the same for NJ.


----------



## Hooch (Jul 22, 2011)

Our area over the last few years have really stepped up on getting the small towns in this county ready for mainly earthquakes but other stuff could happen and alot more folks now are way more prepared than others. 

I see it as the more people who adopt the idea of being prepared, the less zombies in the long run I will have to deal with...possibly..at least I hope...or very least buys me more time. 

The efforts our local emergency response person has put together a county wide plan as well as each individual community plan together with the support of all the local residents who want to participate AND with the support of all the local volunteer fire deptments, search and rescue, tribal, all law enforcement agencies, coast guard, local businesses, hosiptal n clinics, county schools, local transportation services,Animal control n humane society, The ham radio folks, fisherman, loggers with big equiptment etc. Its really actually impressive what has been done and put together. 

There is still alot to do as far as getting more community citizens involved in taking responsibility in being individually prepared for thier families but it's way better than it was a few years ago. They tell folks to have at least a month of food and water here. Mainly because its a more realistic number when living in a rural area. 

Right now if we had a cascadia shake...and all the bridges were taken out 3 small towns have preplaced equiptment and supplies to hang for awhile, not counting peoples own home readiness plans. 

The largest town in the county has been the hardest to get regular joe type citizens involved in training, & planning. Maybe they think because walmart or safeways is right here they wont have to worry about it?? Not sure but they have been doing alot of community education like the cert training and other trainings n what not and had a whole building at the recent county fair dedicated to community & family prepardness. 

We all know if we choose to live in earthquake country and right next to the cascadia zone..we potentially could be in for a good shaker or tsumani..again... So, Im glad that this person has taken the reins and done so much in a few years. It wont help those who refuse to take precautions...but many have been open to it adn in the end that helps out folks like me/ us i thimk :flower:


----------



## camo2460 (Feb 10, 2013)

cnsper said:


> How was bad planning on the gov'ts part the fault for no electricity? Is that not the responsibility of the power company? Gov't can't and should not be responsible for everything.


It's not, the bad planning came in after the storms and trying to react when they should have been acting. Sorry for the lack of clarity.


----------



## Tweto (Nov 26, 2011)

I have never thought about how the state handles emergencies. Then I realized that I don't know what the state has said they will do. 

I live in a private area that is surrounded by farms. The nearest town is 5 miles and the next closest is 14 miles. Where I live there are no sirens. But when we have emergencies here it is always the private citizens that do the cleanup. There are no state or county public roads in my area. When we have snow local guys cleanup and I do the road in front of my house and another 1/4 of a mile. There were times after blizzards when the 7 miles of roads in my area were cleaned up within 4 hours of major snow and then we had to wait up to 3 days for the state to do the highway.

When we have wind storms and there are trees down we are all out there with our chainsaws opening up the road.

Outside of my area every farmer has tractors, bobcats, graders, etc. The amount of equipment owned by the private sector dwarfs anything the state has.

It really doesn't mater what the state does.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

masterspark said:


> Try to see the sunny side folks, someone who reads the state info may actually take prepping seriously like ya'll.


 I wonder if anyone takes it seriously.

It seems to me there are two camps: 
1) serious preppers who look out for their own well being, and 
2) "other people" that care not to prepare one tiny bit.

Generally, neither of those two groups cares about what the state says. That leaves a smattering of a few families here and there that get the message, but they are the "_three days food_" type, not serious preppers.


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

I agree with Tweto - those of us who live in rural areas probably have the advantage of not only knowing how to do things; but, the wherewithal to do them. People in rural communities seem to be significantly more self-sufficient and prepared because to us an emergency is only something for which we didn't plan a contingency - hopefully those are few and far between. 

We all know the grid is aging. The difference among even members of this board is what do you do with that information? Most of us have generators. What's the contingency if the fuel runs out? The road is blocked and you can't get to the store? Then you either don't have enough preps or the right preps.

I read the FEMA, state, Red Cross, etc. guidelines knowing they are the very basic of information - a starting place. Unfortunately, too many people take the "three days of food and water" to heart and that's where they stop. And that's essentially the problem - too many people are willing to let someone else advise them of what should be a personal family disaster preparedness plan. 

While I understand what masterspark is saying about the state plan being a guideline to family plans, the ones I've seen so far miss the mark because it's not the right message for the reader. The same message is sent to everyone so it's understandable why country people and city people don't see eye-to-eye on the need to be prepared. The authors of too many of these plans are more interested in demonstrating how smart they are instead of putting the effort into the message and the audience. IMHO.


----------



## Hooch (Jul 22, 2011)

I forgot to add an interesting tidbit, I was having a conversation with the same emergency response coor for our county. Awhile ago when she was at a statewide meeting with Fema and other counties, Fema told her the 3 coastal counties closest to the cascadia subduction zone, Humboldt, Del Norte and Mendocino counties that the people eventually would be "relocated" inland to North Eastern counties in California to like Modoc, Siskiyou counties if we had a big quake or other serious event (?). She said she openly laughed and them and stated something to the likes that they obviously had no idea the type of people they were dealing with. She informed them there would be some folks that might like the idea to go only because they choose to not be preparred but good luck with trying to relocate those who are the rugged self sufficient type. 

That conversation she had with fema though inspired her to really put in alot of effort to try and educate those willing to listen to get involved in thier communities plan as well as building a family plan. And they frankly informed her that if a cascadia zone ripped, rural communities would be on their own for weeks because they (fema resources) would likely be focased on large cities like in Oregon and Washington.


----------



## Jimmy24 (Apr 20, 2011)

Geek999 said:


> Utilities are very heavily regulated, including the setting of rates and the amount that can be spent on capital improvements or maintenance.
> 
> With that regulation comes responsibility. Here in NJ we obviously need a major effort to move lines from above ground to underground. Between the cost, need to dig up rights of way, and other factors, this is for all practical purposes a government decision.


As much as I know underground utilities sounds like the answer, it is actually the worst thing a state/county/city could do.

Underground is as bad and most of the time worst than overhead construction. At least in a severe hurricane. When UG equipment is subjected to washed out, unstable ground, padmounts submerged, it takes longer and more $$$$ to restore. Yes in inland areas, UG utilities may work better.

Jimmy


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

Hooch said:


> Our area over the last few years have really stepped up on getting the small towns ...


Ok. Back in the 70's and 80s I worked for a small Town.

Ice storm took out electric for almost the entire county.

Our small Town water utility ran their entire plant from a natural gas generator so the Town still had water and fire protection.

The Town's Sewer Plant had a diesel generator running the treatment plant and lift stations. You could flush your stool.

So if you lived in Town you had running water and sewer disposal. If you had a natural gas hot water heater, hot water too!

The County Seat City called us up looking for generators that they could borrow. Their utilities were all down and they had until the water towers ran dry to find generators. :nuts:


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Jimmy24 said:


> As much as I know underground utilities sounds like the answer, it is actually the worst thing a state/county/city could do.
> 
> Underground is as bad and most of the time worst than overhead construction. At least in a severe hurricane. When UG equipment is subjected to washed out, unstable ground, padmounts submerged, it takes longer and more $$$$ to restore. Yes in inland areas, UG utilities may work better.
> 
> Jimmy


You make a good point for the coastal areas, which got all the News coveraage. However, the biggest problem with Sandy, once you got a couple hundred yards inland, was downed trees. We had 45,000 trees down across power lines in northern NJ.


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

It's so expensive to retrofit existing overhead lines underground which is why most communities aren't able to do it. I appreciate the effort of our rural electric co-op to keep the easements and adjacent trees trimmed so our power outages are kept to a minimum. 

One of the biggest advantages - for us - living out in the boonies is we have our own water well, our own septic, and both a residential generator (with an automatic transfer switch) and a portable generator. We can hand-pump from the water well should we chose not to run a generator. The septic just follows the lines out to the tanks. 

I would hate to live in the city again where you're at the mercy of their - or lack of - plans.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

This area has one of the oldest and least reliable electrical infrastructures in the country. The fact that Sandy took out power for so long was a direct result of lack of maintenance and lack of upgrading to that infrastructure. Expense is the standard excuse for not putting lines in the ground, but nothing else is being done to upgrade. I think the process of putting the lines in the ground would take 20 years, but if we continue to stick our heads in the sand it just means we don't start and the time frame moves out further.


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

Geek999 said:


> This area has one of the oldest and least reliable electrical infrastructures in the country. The fact that Sandy took out power for so long was a direct result of lack of maintenance and lack of upgrading to that infrastructure.


Maybe it was because Hurricane Sandy was a disaster of catastrophic proportions and significant damage was going to happen.



Geek999 said:


> Expense is the standard excuse for not putting lines in the ground, but nothing else is being done to upgrade.


Yes, money is the standard excuse; however, let's put the shoe on the right foot.... customers are the ones to shoulder the costs and they just don't want an increase in their electric bill.



Geek999 said:


> I think the process of putting the lines in the ground would take 20 years, but if we continue to stick our heads in the sand it just means we don't start and the time frame moves out further.


I agree you have to start somewhere; however, wherever that "start" is will be upsetting to people on the other end because they'll be shouldering the cost for years and not have the benefit.

While underground lines make sense in new construction, they are not always the best solutions in retrofits. As I said in our case, underground utilities would be extremely expensive so our rural co-op does the very best next thing and that is to keep the easements clear. We have some significant forests in this part of Texas so that's not always an easy task. What makes it work is they go through every part of their service area every three years and clean the easements including tree trimming.

The struggle for all of us, from NJ to Texas, is the Billy Bobs who have a huge tree right beside / under the electric line and refuse to have the tree cut back / cut down because it wouldn't look right. And that's the tree that loses a limb that takes down the line.

All of us should have power outages in our plans, from short-term to long-term. It's not an emergency if you have a plan.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Country Living said:


> Maybe it was because Hurricane Sandy was a disaster of catastrophic proportions and significant damage was going to happen.
> 
> Yes, money is the standard excuse; however, let's put the shoe on the right foot.... customers are the ones to shoulder the costs and they just don't want an increase in their electric bill.
> 
> ...


So what you are saying is it is okay for the state and the utilities to do nothing and sit back and watch the system crumble?

Understand that the experience with Sandy is was completely different from what was on the news. The news showed coastal areas getting flooded and that was where the major damage and expense occurred. However, power in NJ was out all the way to Pennsylvania, and the only reason was downed trees.

The trees are not being kept clear of the lines as this was the third such incident in 13 months. There is still nothing obvious being done about the trees as we have this discussion.

I agree that the lack of reliability is a reason to prep. I was the most comfortable in my neighborhood, because I have zero confidence in either the state or the utilities, so I prep instead. I don't think that makes the state's lack of emergency preparations okay.


----------



## Dakine (Sep 4, 2012)

Geek999 said:


> Utilities are very heavily regulated, including the setting of rates and the amount that can be spent on capital improvements or maintenance.
> 
> With that regulation comes responsibility. Here in NJ we obviously need a major effort to move lines from above ground to underground. Between the cost, need to dig up rights of way, and other factors, this is for all practical purposes a government decision.


I disagree with that, in fact I think that gov't involvement in energy is a huge problem in the first place. How much competition is there in the energy market? basically none right?

Also, the decision to bury power lines... NEGATIVE! Here's from the Washington Post (take their articles as seriously as you choose, but I think the cost analysis is probably accurate)



> But right away, as Sommer Mathis of Atlantic Cities explained, they ran into a familiar obstacle: It's expensive to bury power lines in the nation's capital. A 2010 study (pdf) found that the D.C. area could prevent more than 1,000 outages a year by burying all of its overhead lines. But it would cost $5.8 billion, adding $226 to customers' monthly electricity bills for the next 10 years. Even a partial plan that would bury just some of the lines, and eliminate 60 percent of outages, would cost $1.6 billion.


source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/25/why-most-cities-dont-bury-power-lines/

here in commiefornia I'm not about to start voting for unions to get their wet dream fantasies satisfied with my power bill going up $200 per month. I pay far too much in a scam monopoly as it is.

Anyone who invites government in to solve a situation is making the problem worse, not better. Governments being funded to solve problems makes them worse not better, and it makes my quality of life... worse... not better.

See the pattern?


----------



## Hooch (Jul 22, 2011)

one time out whole countys power was taken out by a turkey..it took power crews 3 days to get to /find the crispy critter.

Our main line into the county goes through some serious woods over the mountain down from oregon...anyways...i thought it was fun. 

Another time when I lived on top of a mountain in Klamath we had a really bad storm that lasted for a few days. It caused a landslide on our only road..took out a whole section of the road. Even if we coulda gotten off teh mountain you couldnt get north or south due to big redwood trees downed all over hwy 101..That took crews a few days to clear and of course the power was out for like 2 weeks. 

for the nest few weeks if anyone wanted off the mountain we had to hike 5 miles down the pacific coast trail to where our company stashed vehicles that happened to not be on the mountain when it all broke loose...

those were some interesting times...I remember I loved the power outtage due to how quiet it was..no frackin tv or loud music..nice!


----------



## Dakine (Sep 4, 2012)

Geek999 said:


> So what you are saying is it is okay for the state and the utilities to do nothing and sit back and watch the system crumble?
> 
> Understand that the experience with Sandy is was completely different from what was on the news. The news showed coastal areas getting flooded and that was where the major damage and expense occurred. However, power in NJ was out all the way to Pennsylvania, and the only reason was downed trees.
> 
> ...


I would follow your line of thinking... IF but not until... a law were passed that ALL profits from the power company and any suppliers in equal or greater share to their contribution to the "grid" are directed solely into the new project of burying the lines. They make NO money until this is done, and let us not forget that 1/2 of our power bill is "transmission" not "generation"!!! They're already charging us for dodgy substandard crap that they deployed decades ago.

Also, no executives will receive any bonuses until the project is complete and 100% of the lines are buried.

Also, the project must be cost neutral to the consumers, who are held hostage by a government mandated monopoly.

Also, there needs to be a list of all elected officials, the union officials and the energy company officials, including Titles, Names, and Job Descriptions that will GO TO JAIL, if the project is not planned and executed to their budget and time frame which needs to be prepared IN ADVANCE of any public vote to ratify the "governed monopoly" to make those changes.

I think the Earth will be destroyed by another Chicxulub or mega-volcano before anyone ever gets that list of demands signed off on, but when they do, I'd be willing to entertain it


----------



## tsrwivey (Dec 31, 2010)

I was listening to Doctors radio today on Sirius & they had a lady on the pediatric show talking about preparedness! Made my day! That radio show is out of a hospital in New York City! NYC slickers talking about preparedness!


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

Hooch said:


> one time out whole countys power was taken out by a turkey..it took power crews 3 days to get to /find the crispy critter.
> 
> Our main line into the county goes through some serious woods over the mountain down from oregon...anyways...i thought it was fun.
> 
> ...


And that is the difference.... some of us see adventuresartydance:while others see insurmountable problems.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Dakine said:


> I would follow your line of thinking... IF but not until... a law were passed that ALL profits from the power company and any suppliers in equal or greater share to their contribution to the "grid" are directed solely into the new project of burying the lines. They make NO money until this is done, and let us not forget that 1/2 of our power bill is "transmission" not "generation"!!! They're already charging us for dodgy substandard crap that they deployed decades ago.
> 
> Also, no executives will receive any bonuses until the project is complete and 100% of the lines are buried.
> 
> ...


So we're going to switch from not allowing them to put lines in the ground to jailing people if they don't put lines in the ground? Expect every executive subject to those rules to immediately resign.

In addition, those rules will result in an immediate filing of bankruptcy. Every utility in the country has bonds outstanding and you will have just caused a violation of the debt covenants.

The fact is this can be done over a period of time with a modest increase in rates. It is expensive, but not unaffordable.


----------



## Dakine (Sep 4, 2012)

Geek999 said:


> So we're going to switch from not allowing them to put lines in the ground to jailing people if they don't put lines in the ground? Expect every executive subject to those rules to immediately resign.
> 
> In addition, those rules will result in an immediate filing of bankruptcy. Every utility in the country has bonds outstanding and you will have just caused a violation of the debt covenants.
> 
> The fact is this can be done over a period of time with a modest increase in rates. It is expensive, but not unaffordable.


No, that isn't true at all.

I'm not opposed to them burying lines, I think they should and I think we can do it in an acceptable time frame.

What I'm opposed to is a state sponsored monopoly "handing over the costs" to the consumer who has NEARLY ZERO recourse or options for alternatives.

Honestly I dont care for half a second if all of those executives resign. I'm actually really good with that.

I think it's high time that corporations and public funded companies and government sponsored monopolies stopped handing over the cost over-runs to the consumers and started paying for it themselves.

That statement might sound really liberal.. I understand. But I make that statement from my high ground that "that company" should not be in the position to make unilateral changes that the consumer has no recourse because the approval process is baked in with committees and legislators who are bought and paid for with both union and corporate greed.

That's why I said put ALL of them on the hook, you chose to mention the power company executives, but I want them all in the adjacent cells.

Seriously... enough of their strangle hold on the consumers. Our "representatives" don't "represent" us at all!!! they represent their chances at being re-elected, so... YEAH!!! I have MASSIVE problems with everything regarding letting power companies and legislature bodies make rules without a fully informed public vote.

(this is where me and the OWS crowd usually part company, although there are gray fuzzy lines we agree on elsewhere too... anyway)


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Dakine said:


> No, that isn't true at all.
> 
> I'm not opposed to them burying lines, I think they should and I think we can do it in an acceptable time frame.
> 
> ...


Our local utilities have absolutely no public funding. However they are highly regulated. Your argument does not apply here, though perhhaps in your area the electricity is municipal power.

Furthermore, there are changes going on similar to what the phone industry went through to change the monopoly structure. I receive about one advertisement a month for some alternative energy provider. It isn't compelling yet, but it is improving.


----------



## Dakine (Sep 4, 2012)

Geek999 said:


> Our local utilities have absolutely no public funding. However they are highly regulated. Your argument does not apply here, though perhhaps in your area the electricity is municipal power.
> 
> Furthermore, there are changes going on similar to what the phone industry went through to change the monopoly structure. I receive about one advertisement a month for some alternative energy provider. It isn't compelling yet, but it is improving.


If you're not presented the option, do you want to buy energy from Supplier A, B or C then it is ALL PUBLIC FUNDING, because by "heavily regulated" you mean government sponsored monopoly. And like I said, we know who gets paid off when that happens... the politicians who vote for the monopolies and the big shots at the power companies and the unions in both the public and private sector that have anything to do with it. Its in their best interest to keep it status quo and make it just bad enough that people want to keep feeding the machine but not quite bad enough that they want to trash the entire system and start over. I'm an advocate of starting over. They've stolen enough of my money as it is.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Dakine said:


> If you're not presented the option, do you want to buy energy from Supplier A, B or C then it is ALL PUBLIC FUNDING, because by "heavily regulated" you mean government sponsored monopoly. And like I said, we know who gets paid off when that happens... the politicians who vote for the monopolies and the big shots at the power companies and the unions in both the public and private sector that have anything to do with it. Its in their best interest to keep it status quo and make it just bad enough that people want to keep feeding the machine but not quite bad enough that they want to trash the entire system and start over. I'm an advocate of starting over. They've stolen enough of my money as it is.


There is not one penny of taxpayer dollars involved, so you're just making up your own definition of "public funding". To the extent there was ever a monopoly, that is the supposed reason for regulation and the state being able to restrict rates, and that is breaking down as I indicated earlier. Consumers pay the bill, just as they do for everything else they consume, though in this case they are paying an artificially low rate due to regulation.

The practice here, despite your throwing around words like "stolen" has been to not allow utilities to charge enough to maintain or upgrade the system, leading to all of our problems during Sandy and other storms.

Fortunately, alternatives are developing and there are already cracks in the system of over-regulation. The generation and transmission businesses are coming apart. There are companies stepping in that buy power in bulk and then undercut the power company when reselling the power. I just had a pitch from a company that provides a solar power alternative and undercuts the power company. I already own a generator tied into the house. The trend is clearly away from monopoly power providers.

The only way traditional power companies are going to be able to improve their reliability is to be allowed to charge enough to pay for the maintenance and system upgrades required. Your position sounds like the OWS crowd.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

masterspark said:


> Threadjacked!!:thumbdown:


The original post was about state level preparations for disasters. I made the claim that the state of NJ is not prepared for even simple disasters, e.g. our recent experiences of 3 storms in the past 2 years taking out power each time for multiple days for a broad swath of the state. The electrical grid is among the most vulnerable in the nation. The question of how to fix the problem is a natural extension.

Feel free to offer your opinions on other states.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Back to my point, NJ doesn't so anything obvious to prepare for emergencies, even after they have happened. Evidence, the grid here. Okay?


----------



## k0xxx (Oct 27, 2011)

There are certain realities that those in government have to deal with and IMHO you can't really equate having above ground utilities with not doing anything to prepare for emergencies. The state could certainly mandate that all electrical transmission lines be buried. However, I can just as certainly say that when the majority of residents saw their next electric bills, reflecting the huge expenditures required, there would be a mass revolt.

New Jersey actually does do a lot in the way of preparedness. The NJ Office of Emergency Management website has a wealth of information for it's citizens. New Jersey does participate in drills and run hazard mitigation and recovery scenarios. There's only so much the state can (and should) do, to prepare for disasters. YMMV


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

k0xxx said:


> There are certain realities that those in government have to deal with and IMHO you can't really equate having above ground utilities with not doing anything to prepare for emergencies. The state could certainly mandate that all electrical transmission lines be buried. However, I can just as certainly say that when the majority of residents saw their next electric bills, reflecting the huge expenditures required, there would be a mass revolt.
> 
> New Jersey actually does do a lot in the way of preparedness. The NJ Office of Emergency Management website has a wealth of information for it's citizens. New Jersey does participate in drills and run hazard mitigation and recovery scenarios. There's only so much the state can (and should) do, to prepare for disasters. YMMV


I live in NJ and we are still recovering from Sandy, while our Governor wants to celebrate how we "survived the storm". While putting the lines in the ground is what I recommend, I do not see any visible response to make the grid more reliable. I can understand that someone might have a different way of going about dealing with the problem. The quick approach would be to do some significant tree maintenance. That isn't happening either.

A website with a bunch of information is nice, but basically that just puts things back to individuals to deal with on their own. As far as drills, etc. these only involve the "professionals", i.e. police, fire, etc. This insures that in a large disaster they will be overrun as they have left out obvious volunteer groups like the Boy Scouts, Red Cross, etc. The main "volunteer" activity during the storms was individuals with chain saws cutting up trees that were across roads, and there was not much of that, nor was it organized in any way.

The actual performance of the state during the last several storms was minimal and I see no reason to expect it to get any better in the future. As a result, I am prepping based on the expectation there will be no useful government response in even the simplest scenario, like a hurricane. I also think it is reasonable to expect further deterioration of the grid within the state.

I agree that there is only so much the state can do, but with the experience we have had with storms in the past few years we should be dealing with the electrical grid in a much more aggressive manner.


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

Geek999 said:


> I live in NJ and we are still recovering from Sandy, while our Governor wants to celebrate how we "survived the storm". While putting the lines in the ground is what I recommend, I do not see any visible response to make the grid more reliable. I can understand that someone might have a different way of going about dealing with the problem. The quick approach would be to do some significant tree maintenance. That isn't happening either.


Then you know you have to be self-reliant and get a generator and store plenty of fuel.



Geek999 said:


> A website with a bunch of information is nice, but basically that just puts things back to individuals to deal with on their own. As far as drills, etc. these only involve the "professionals", i.e. police, fire, etc. This insures that in a large disaster they will be overrun as they have left out obvious volunteer groups like the Boy Scouts, Red Cross, etc. The main "volunteer" activity during the storms was individuals with chain saws cutting up trees that were across roads, and there was not much of that, nor was it organized in any way.


Therein lies the problem. It sounds like the mentality is more of a "someone else will take care of this" instead of "what can I do to help my family and/or my neighborhood/area?" Unfortunately, relying on these outside groups only puts people to whining instead of doing what they need to do for their family and/or neighbors/area.

This is what I mean by the message not being appropriate for most of the community. The first problem is "the government is here to help" and the second problem is "people think the government is here to help". Your personal disaster preparedness plan should be independent of these larger community and state efforts.

Your plan cannot be to use someone else's plan. That seems to be the core of the problem.



Geek999 said:


> The actual performance of the state during the last several storms was minimal and I see no reason to expect it to get any better in the future. As a result, I am prepping based on the expectation there will be no useful government response in even the simplest scenario, like a hurricane. I also think it is reasonable to expect further deterioration of the grid within the state.


That's a valid response. It's much more productive to put your effort and energy towards something you can control than complaining about something you can't control.



Geek999 said:


> I agree that there is only so much the state can do, but with the experience we have had with storms in the past few years we should be dealing with the electrical grid in a much more aggressive manner.


It looks like you're going to keep looping back to a single solution of burying lines. Unless you can build your own power plant, maybe a generator and fuel would keep your family safe during power outages.

As for me, I wish admin would bring back the "beating a dead horse with a stick" emoticon. IMHO.


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Country Living said:


> Then you know you have to be self-reliant and get a generator and store plenty of fuel.
> 
> Therein lies the problem. It sounds like the mentality is more of a "someone else will take care of this" instead of "what can I do to help my family and/or my neighborhood/area?" Unfortunately, relying on these outside groups only puts people to whining instead of doing what they need to do for their family and/or neighbors/area.
> 
> ...


So I am beating a dead horse. People seem to want to argue that NJ is doing a good job. I respond. I live here and I don't think the state is doing a good job, nor do I think they are even addressing the obvious problems brought out by the last 3 disasters.

If you think your own state is doing a good job, then I am glad for you.


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

Back on topic.... the problem with the majority of state and local plans is they are in support of getting the government back online (duh!) Their plans deal primarily with infrastructure (this is not the overhead / underground power line discussion). Most plans are at an event level and within that event outline the probable situations such as power outage, water and septic, gasoline for city, county, state, and residential use, traffic and related logistics as well as food supply chain issues. Those basic plans (usually) work well within their intended framework. Within Texas, local as well as state governments (in our case the sheriff) has the right to confiscate gasoline and diesel in order to keep their vehicles (as well as state vehicles) running. There is no mandate to provide gasoline to Joe Blow if it's in short supply. It's usually a nice thing to do; but, one tanker of gasoline doesn't help thousands of people.

Let me take a step back and, hopefully, tie some things together. I worked for a very large company that has a robust disaster preparedness program. The program has a dedicated team and also uses resources that could be diverted to the program as needed. The company has an excellent program for keeping or getting the business up and running during and after an event.

As robust as this company's plan is (I retired several years ago and am confident it's still an excellent program), nothing was ever done at the employee level to educate them on what to do before, during, and after an event to keep their family safe and to allow them to come to work to keep the business up and running during and after an event.

There is an overlying theme the government (and businesses as applicable) must be up and running to bring order to chaos. And that's the primary purpose of local and state plans. The plans I've seen are good at the high level and significantly lacking on guidance for the individual. Ready.gov is a decent website; but, it also can be confusing for the normal person who doesn't even know they need to know anything about disaster preparedness.

Until the bigger plans address the need to educate at a level appropriate for that area and population, chaos will run rampant after an event. If you tell someone in a very rural community they need at least six months of food and water, you'll probably get laughed at because that's just our normal way of life. If you tell the big city person the same thing, they'll shrug their shoulders and say there's a grocery store (or several) within a mile of their house.

Every level of government has a lot of work to do to educate the general population they need a family plan. Unfortunately, this means the government has to back off from the presumption they will take care of everything. I remember one lady on the news after Sandy hit NJ and she was yelling at the reporter she needed someone to come pump out her basement. That's not the government's job.

I look at a lot of plans just because I want to see if I can learn something. The major difference between a government plan and the disaster preparedness plan we use at the ranch is we focus on effect instead of cause. We don't care what caused the power outage... .the power is out. If a tree falls, it's firewood instead of a nuisance. 

It's forums such as this one that give a glimmer of hope and education to people who know they need to do something and are looking for a road map. The first thing they need to know is to have a plan that is not dependent on someone else's plan. The electricity is out... deal with it.... keeping enough food and potable water as well as having a way to cook and clean is tantamount to survival.

Bottom line - state and local plans are for the state and local governments. That's their purpose. It would be nice if they had dedicated resources (people and media) to educate their communities; however, that's a cost that is probably not in the budget. There's just not a good answer.


----------



## DKRinAK (Nov 21, 2011)

The State of Alaska (SoA) has this 
http://ready.alaska.gov/plans/

The Muni here in Anchorage has this
http://www.muni.org/departments/oem/pages/default.aspx

I've been told by folks within the power industry that if we get hit with another major quake, we can expect parts of Anchorage to be without power for 6 months, or longer.

Ya. So, in our case, waiting for the wife to decide it's time to move again....


----------



## Country Living (Dec 15, 2009)

Geek999 said:


> So I am beating a dead horse. People seem to want to argue that NJ is doing a good job. I respond. I live here and I don't think the state is doing a good job, nor do I think they are even addressing the obvious problems brought out by the last 3 disasters.
> 
> If you think your own state is doing a good job, then I am glad for you.


Move......


----------



## Geek999 (Jul 9, 2013)

Country Living said:


> Move......


I plan to, but I won't be choosing the new location based on disaster plans. If the state is good at such things, that will be a nice bonus.


----------



## VUnder (Sep 1, 2011)

The whole mess we are in now is because of government involvement. Government should get out of public utilities, period. It is all an assault on capitalism. Everything government is involved in goes bad. Just like the roads. The state has this large road department with all kinds of equipment. But, when it is time to build a road, a contractor does it. Contractors are used to meeting deadlines and bottom lines. Kinda like the independent auto dealer in our town. Corporate wanted to get rid of independent dealers. Advertised the price of vehicles on TV, then he already knew what he could sell them for, what he had to get. So, he was squeezed out because of lack of profit. Same thing with utilities, government regulates the price, it costs them x amount to produce....so government puts the squeeze on them. On the other hand, if government was not involved, there would be more money available and possibly some new developments improving electricity could have happened. If power was very expensive, maybe some entrepreneur inventor would have incentive to do something about it. I understand that it makes the country better as a whole to have electricity available to every home. Look at all the people that gets their juice cut off ever couple of months but the power company has to turn them back on as soon as they show up with the money. Most any other company would cut you off and leave you alone. But, the government sets those rules.

I believe that government, union leadership, and organized crime are all three made up of the same types of individuals.

I have heard some union people say they are against Obama, Obamacare, and they didn't support him. Well, if you paid union dues and it went to the democrat party, yes you did.


----------

