When he says an “apocalyptic event” - he’s talking about the Webster’s dictionary definition - which is “a great disaster”. And certainly, the electrical grid going down in the USA is a “great disaster” but it’s not the Tribulation of the Bible. That’s where you’re going wrong here. You’re linking the two and there’s not a link.
Look at it another way if it will help you. It was an “apocalypse” in Germany at the end of the war (a great disaster for the German people) - but it was not the Tribulation of the Bible.
And in Japan, with all that bombing and the two nuclear bombs - it was an “apocalypse” for the Japanese people (a great disaster), but it was not the Tribulation of the Bible.
I hope that clears it up for you.
“Armageddon” is also thrown around a lot these days to mean a catastrophic event. But these terms derive from Biblical accounts and are often used to describe things that people fear will bring about the end of the world as we know it. “Apocalypse” is often used interchangeably with “Armageddon” and the end-time tribulation. You can take it to mean what you want. It certainly is not off point here.