We've done a lot to develop protections for these systems after the Quebec incident, and we saw multiple providers, including PJM, actively need to use these protections over the weekend.
And this storm was significantly lower in intensity than the Carrington event.
Why would you conclude that, because a far weaker storm than one that has occurred in modern history didn't destroy civilization, that the fear of a far stronger storm is overblown? We don't have to guess what the damage would be from that sort of storm - we know why it caused the damage we did, and we can understand the damage it would do to modern infrastructure if not protected against.
If we continue to harden the grid against these storms, we might well be able to survive a Carrington (or stronger) level storm, but it will be because we took the proper precautions because we understand how big the risk is.
And this storm was significantly lower in intensity than the Carrington event.
Why would you conclude that, because a far weaker storm than one that has occurred in modern history didn't destroy civilization, that the fear of a far stronger storm is overblown? We don't have to guess what the damage would be from that sort of storm - we know why it caused the damage we did, and we can understand the damage it would do to modern infrastructure if not protected against.
If we continue to harden the grid against these storms, we might well be able to survive a Carrington (or stronger) level storm, but it will be because we took the proper precautions because we understand how big the risk is.