When Fire, Extreme Heat, and an Aging Electrical Grid Intersect
Imagine: it’s the peak of summer in the Southwest, and a heat wave is surging after a spring of heavy rains. To keep cool, you crank up the air conditioning. In the distance, an aging power line sags under the strain of the heat. A spark escapes the line’s faulty insulation, landing in overgrown brush that grew during the rainy season but has died and dried up in the heat, turning to tinder. Flames erupt and before long, a wildfire is beginning to spread. The local utility, hoping to avoid additional ignitions that could spread firefighting resources too thin, shuts off power. The tactic works – firefighters are able to contain the emerging threat before it reaches your neighborhood and home – but at a cost. With people unable to keep their AC running while the power shutoff is in place, temperatures inside homes soar and dozens of people are rushed to the hospital for heat-related illness.
This scenario is becoming less and less hypothetical as the risks of wildfire and extreme heat compound with an aging electric grid.
We are a nation powered by, well, power; modern American society has evolved around the electric grid. Yet aging U.S. electric infrastructure (the majority of which was built over 30 years ago and has received minimal upgrades since) is increasingly strained by growing cooling demand as heat waves become more frequent and widespread, as well as physically threatened by wildfires and other extreme weather events. And when the power goes out during or after extreme weather, hamstringing essential health, information, and emergency-response systems, the consequences of extreme weather become much worse. In these ways, the electric grid is a backbone of U.S. resilience to extreme weather. The grid is the place where cascading impacts of extreme weather and other effects of climate change converge – but managed appropriately, the grid can also be a robust line of defense.
Zooming in on the intersections between the grid, heat, and wildfire illustrates these broader trends while also yielding immediately actionable insights. The electric grid is a critical asset for keeping people cool during extreme heat. Yet the electric grid is also a wildfire risk because old and outdated equipment can emit sparks that catch fire in nearby vegetation or other flammable materials. Extreme heat increases energy demand on this same outdated equipment, which strains generation, transmission, and distribution systems and heightens wildfire risk.
Addressing these challenges involves complex questions about who should pay for necessary infrastructure upgrades and who is liable for grid failures that endanger lives and property. Fortunately, there are powerful opportunities to advance co-beneficial technologies and strategies that simultaneously strengthen the grid, build resilience to extreme heat and wildfires, and bring down energy costs for consumers.
Wildfires, Extreme Heat, and an Aging Grid: A Dangerous Combination
The electric grid poses a substantial wildfire threat for many states. In California, for example, 10% of all wildfires between 2016 and 2020 were caused by electrical power, leading to over 3.3 million acres burned. Since 2015, power lines have caused six out of California’s 20 most destructive wildfires. In 2023, the citizens of Lahaina, Maui experienced the deadliest U.S. wildfire in more than 100 years when a broken power line set nearby vegetation ablaze. The following year, the largest wildfire in Texas history burned more than a million acres; after several months of investigation, the cause was determined to be a decaying utility pole that caught fire.
Extreme heat brings the chances of wildfire ignition resulting from aging grid infrastructure to a rolling boil. Record-high temperatures drive up air conditioning (AC) use, which increases energy demand and strains the grid. Extreme heat can also cause power lines to sag and expand and transformers to overheat. In 2022, Southern California Edison power lines sagged under extreme heat conditions and came in contact with a communications line, producing sparks that ignited the dry vegetation below. The resulting wildfire near Hemet, California impacted tens of thousands of residents.
Given the wildfire risk that grids can pose, some utilities have implemented safety mechanisms to protect the public. For example, transmission lines in some service areas shut off automatically when the presence of smoke or fire is detected nearby. Additionally, utilities may proactively shut off power when the risk of wildfire is high in order to reduce the likelihood of equipment-related ignitions that could get out of control. This is a common practice; roughly one in three wildfire-related outages from 2000 to 2024 were public safety power shutoffs (PSPS).
While these PSPS shutoffs can reduce wildfire risk, they come at a dangerous cost when combined with high temperatures. Power shutoffs meant to prevent fire damage leave people without air conditioning, which most Americans rely on exclusively for cooling. Without AC or alternative cooling strategies, people are more vulnerable to developing heat-related illness. Power outages can also compound the heat-health risk by leaving people without refrigerated medications and electricity-dependent medical devices, and limiting communication options during medical emergencies – emergencies that are more likely to occur during extreme heat events.
Protecting Communities by Investing in a Resilient Grid
A resilient electric grid helps communities stay safe, comfortable, and healthy in the face of extreme weather. Examples of strategies that can be used to build community resilience through grid resilience include:
- Grid hardening. Grid hardening refers to techniques that improve the ability of physical grid infrastructure to resist damage from external stressors like extreme temperatures and wildfires. One example is “undergrounding”; i.e., replacing overhead transmission lines with subsurface networks. Undergrounding reduces the risk of wildfire ignition from electrical equipment and protects transmission infrastructure from heat-related sagging, though it can have a high cost per mile to implement. Another example of grid hardening is replacing traditional wood poles with composite materials such as steel or fiberglass that are more resilient to high temperatures and fire.
- Grid-enhancing technologies. Grid-enhancing technologies can be deployed when feasible, which can increase capacity on the current electrical system. The usage of advanced conductors, which can maintain better performance at higher operating temperatures, and demand-response algorithms can reduce grid loads during peak periods, such as the hottest parts of the day.
- Building additional distributed generation while expanding transmission capacity. Decentralized electricity generation (such as solar-plus-storage systems, flexible load programs, and community microgrids) can operate independently during power outages caused by PSPSs or rolling blackouts. Decentralized generation systems provide localized backup during emergencies and relieve pressure on centralized grid infrastructure during heat waves and other periods of very high energy demand. In the long term, getting more renewable energy resources connected to the grid and building high-voltage transmission lines that can transport the energy over longer distances can support a more abundant and flexible power supply.
- Increasing local, regional, and interregional coordination. Coordination is essential because responsibilities for grid operations, emergency response, and utility regulation are often shared across multiple jurisdictions and agencies. For example, utilities maintain infrastructure, while Public Utility Commissions (PUCs) regulate service standards and local governments often manage emergency response and planning. When multiple service areas are affected by a wildfire and extreme heat event, interregional coordination, such as data sharing and real-time weather-impacts monitoring, ensures that potential grid risks and vulnerabilities are shared and response efforts are coordinated. For instance, utilities can coordinate with first responders and emergency response agencies when ordering PSPSs in their service territories.
- Planning for negative externalities from power outages. Utilities can identify and support customers at the highest risk for negative outcomes (e.g., food spoilage, illness, business impacts, emergency services) associated with PSPS, especially those compounded by co-occurring hazards like extreme heat and wildfires. States like Colorado have had to intervene on behalf of customers for negative impacts of PSPS. Thus, it is important for utilities to plan for how they will support their customers.
Opportunity Areas for Policy Action
Many of the measures identified above require substantial upfront investment as well as coordination across multiple levels of government. This raises an important policy question: who should be responsible for shouldering the costs of grid resilience upgrades in the face of more frequent and costly extreme weather events?
Certain resilience measures can only be implemented by utilities who own the physical infrastructure that needs upgrading in the face of worsening hazards. Some utilities argue that they need legal protections from liability in order to remain financially viable, to be able to invest in essential infrastructure, and to continue delivering the energy that powers our lives. To this end, some utilities have advocated for liability protection legislation in multiple states that would grant them (the utilities) legal immunity or limit the damages they must pay if their infrastructure sparks a wildfire, on the condition that they follow approved wildfire mitigation plans. In return for taking mitigation actions required under these plans, utilities can seek protection from lawsuits that could expose them to billions in damages.
However, extreme weather event victims, insurers, and trial lawyers argue that such protections shift the burden onto residents, leaving them with fewer avenues for compensation and creating perverse incentives for utilities to avoid accountability. Additionally, some utility companies are passing the costs of lawsuit payouts, as well as those of system improvements and delayed maintenance, on to ratepayers through higher electricity bills, raising affordability concerns. For example, Southern California Edison raised rates 13% in 2021 to pay for fire mitigation efforts.
The reality is that no single entity can bear the full cost of making the grid resilient to compounding extreme weather risks, as these are shared risks with shared stakes. Utilities, as noted, have a critical role to play: they own and operate the infrastructure, and they must invest in resilience while keeping energy affordable. But making upgrades and investments at the scale needed to reduce overall risk to the grid and communities in a multi-hazard environment requires a cross-sectoral, multi-pronged approach. The following section identifies the key stakeholders that must partner with electric utilities to build a more resilient grid, outlines their current roles and responsibilities, and suggests opportunity areas for action in this evolving landscape.
Congress
Roles and Responsibilities. Congress plays a key role in supporting subnational utility work. For example, Congress supports grid resilience through funding programs like the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnership (GRIP) from the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Wildfire Electric Grid Resilience Program from Sandia National Laboratory. Congress also appropriates funds to executive branch agencies for the development of foundational federal data and tools, as well as the technical assistance needed for better anticipation and response to compounding risks. Agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) produce high-resolution extreme weather projections that can help utilities and subnational governments assess risk.
Opportunity Areas. Understanding where extreme heat and wildfire are likely to co-occur in the future under various scenarios is essential for supporting proper planning. Where possible, Congress can support modeling and research efforts that provide this information more cost-effectively than subnational efforts and develop technical assistance to help communities plan for these compounding hazards. Congress can also authorize and appropriate funding for test beds and prize challenges that support innovation in multi-hazard grid resilience.
National and International Regulatory Bodies
Roles and Responsibilities. Regulatory bodies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) play vital roles in advancing grid resilience and reliability efforts and standards. NERC develops reliability standards for the electricity sector and FERC enforces them.
Opportunity Areas. Since both FERC and NERC play a role in ensuring the reliability of the electric grid, they should expand their extreme weather reliability standards to include risks when extreme heat and wildfires occur in the same region. FERC and NERC can work together to build on existing and proposed efforts to develop standards related to extreme heat and wildfires that support utilities and grid operators in prioritizing multi-hazard resilience in their planning. In late 2024, NERC finalized standards aimed at improving transmission system planning for extreme heat and extreme cold events.
Additionally, NERC can track how utilities are addressing the risks of wildfires and heat waves as part of its grid reliability monitoring efforts and can include these efforts in its seasonal assessments.
State Legislatures and Public Utility Commissions (PUCs)
Roles and Responsibilities. State legislatures and public utility commissions play an important role in regulating state electricity markets which positions them to incentivize and support resilience. In general, they are responsible for ensuring that their customers receive appropriate services and that rate increases are justified, while ensuring that the utility can recover its costs and reward investors. In most states, the legislature provides the foundation for PUCs to build their underlying statute-informed regulations.
Opportunity Areas. State legislatures can direct utilities and PUCs to prioritize wildfire and extreme heat mitigation through statute and can authorize funding mechanisms – such as cost-recovery provisions or risk-sharing models – that enable utilities to invest in resilience. Some advocates have called for the creation of a voluntary program that incentivizes utilities to take certain mitigation actions by rewarding them with access to an “insurance-like backstop mechanism.” PUCs, in turn, can evaluate and approve utility proposals aligned with these policy goals, including pilot programs that implement grid measures with co-benefits for wildfire and extreme heat resilience.
Investors and Innovators
Roles and Responsibilities: Investors and innovators can provide other types of funding mechanisms to help the aforementioned stakeholders fund their initiatives or provide research services to improve them, especially at the extreme heat and wildfire nexus.
Opportunity Areas. Given the high upfront costs of many existing risk reduction tools, innovation is key to driving down the overall cost of multi-hazard resilience. Private capital and nonprofits can play a broader role in building a more robust innovation ecosystem. For example, Conservation X Labs’s Fire Grand Challenge is offering more than $1 million in prizes and support for wildfire innovation in collaboration with Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, The Coca-Cola Foundation, Esri, and Planet. One of the 12 finalists advancing to field testing is Witching Hour, which is testing a robotic system that installs low-cost insulation onto power lines to reduce fire risk. Future programs modeled on this and other prize challenge efforts can reward innovations that support resilience under both extreme heat and high fire risk.
Looking Ahead: Preparing for Compounding Heat and Wildfire Hazards
A comprehensive approach to upgrading the grid, grid operations, and emergency management protocols driven by the federal government, state governments, utilities, and private sector actors is the most impactful way forward. Lives, economic wellbeing, and property are all costs of inaction.
While grid infrastructure interventions are critical, other measures can also provide important backstops and reduce overall risk that deserve further exploration and integration into an extreme heat and wildfire preparedness and response strategy. For example, alternative cooling strategies that do not rely on air conditioning can reduce grid load – which in turn reduces wildfire risk – and ensure that people are not left sweltering in the heat during public safety power shutoffs. These strategies include passive cooling measures like reflective surfaces, natural ventilation, shading, and insulation. At the same time, prescribed fire and other risk reduction measures in the wildland urban interface can reduce the likelihood that fires that do start are destructive to life or property.
With strategic investment, cross-sector coordination, and long-term planning, it is possible to reduce risks and protect vulnerable communities. We can build a future where power lines no longer spark disaster and homes stay safe and connected — no matter the weather.
With strategic investment, cross-sector coordination, and long-term planning, it is possible to reduce risks and protect vulnerable communities. We can build a future where power lines no longer spark disaster and homes stay safe and connected — no matter the weather.
Confronting this crisis requires decision-makers to understand the lived realities of wildfire risk and resilience, and to work together across party lines. Safewoods helps make both possible.
Yesterday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed revoking its 2009 “endangerment finding” that greenhouse gases pose a substantial threat to the public. The Federation of American Scientists stands in strong opposition.
The Federation of American Scientists supports H.R. 4420, the Cool Corridors Act of 2025, which would reauthorize the Healthy Streets program through 2030 and seeks to increase green and other shade infrastructure in high-heat areas.