California Utilities Plan All Out War On Solar, Please Read And Help

[cali8484]

Assuming the $24 is NBC, has anyone seen analysis on the likely impact on home solar payback under NEM3?

 

[Unclepaul]

Our community was hooked up 50 years ago, with undergrounded utilities. Can't imaging the costs to maintain a connection would be very much.

 

[iPlug]

Does anyone know how much it actually costs utilities to maintain the connection to a house?
I know that "utility math" is obfuscated but there must be some independent analysis of costs.

Not sure there is any indisputable math as there are probably a few credible accounting takes on this. But seems most reliable to model off of what municipal utilities do as they are responsible to their local population, unlike the IOUs.

Roseville, for example charges a fixed $30 monthly minimum. PG&E, if using that modeling, would need to have everyone pay more as lots of delivery to far flung low population density places, or make those regions pay their actual costs incurred.

Roseville:
Rates

 

[Big Dog]

I was wondering why AB1999 was not a slam dunk, to cap or repeal the fixed monthly charge proposal. Apparently it was "tabled" by the CA House Speaker in a procedural maneuver, so never had a chance to come up for a vote. So basically crony politics between the House Speaker and Newsom....

A lot of bills are proposed with no chance of passing. That way the sponsors can claim that they "tried." Politics 101.

But the obvious answer is the simple one: $24/mo raises a whole lot more money than $5/mo.

 

[sorka]

Even if this passes in the senate, Newsom will never sign it. The only bill that is law now is the one that allows the CPUC to tax us without any limits at all.

The only real limit will be what the CPUC and IOUs think they can get away with before enough voters have had enough and either have another recall election or vote out the politicians that supported AB205 in the first place. Is there a number by which this could pass that would override a the governor's veto?

 

[frankvb]

Even if this passes in the senate, Newsom will never sign it. The only bill that is law now is the one that allows the CPUC to tax us without any limits at all.

The only real limit will be what the CPUC and IOUs think they can get away with before enough voters have had enough and either have another recall election or vote out the politicians that supported AB205 in the first place. Is there a number by which this could pass that would override a the governor's veto?

I think this could eventually end up as a ballot initiative, and then the IOUs will use massive amounts of money for advertising against it Similar to what happened with Lyft and Uber.

 

[wwu123]

Pretty upsetting the $24/month is there. I'd much rather a rate increase with a lower monthly. Of course, this would help all solar users more, but also encourage less energy use. AB1999 had this blurb which I'd be very behind (my bolds/color):

California AB1999 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2024-05-09) Electricity: fixed charges. [(Pending re-refer to Com. on APPR.)]

legiscan.com

"This bill would repeal the provisions described in the preceding paragraph. The bill would instead permit the commission to authorize fixed charges that, as of January 1, 2015, do not exceed $5 per residential customer account per month for low-income customers enrolled in the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) program and that do not exceed $10 per residential customer account per month for customers not enrolled in the CARE program. The bill would authorize these maximum allowable fixed charges to be adjusted by no more than the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for the prior calendar year, beginning January 1, 2016."

AB1999 is dead for this legislative session, so it's not going to come up for a vote in the near future.

At least for PG&E territory, the new fixed charge won't come into effect a year later in 2026 for some reason, so we can only hope on AB1999 to come up before then....

 

[frankvb]

AB1999 has been resurrected, but with a $24 fixed fee limit (and no allowed increases, which is at least better than the CPUC ruling).

 

[OldPro]

Thank you once again Gov. Gavin Newsom

 

[bkp_duke]

AB1999 has been resurrected, but with a $24 fixed fee limit (and no allowed increases, which is at least better than the CPUC ruling).

But I believe the version that was resurrected has an expiration of the $24 in a few years, so we would be going through all this again,

 

[Unclepaul]

At least we know how a Frog feels, when the water is constantly being heated up.

 

[miimura]

Just like compound interest, small increments in rates that happen repeatedly, really add up over time.

 

[sorka]

But I believe the version that was resurrected has an expiration of the $24 in a few years, so we would be going through all this again,

And just to be clear, AB205 is law and is what is going into effect. AB1999 is a proposal to repeal AB205 with a proposed much lower utility tax. It has no chance of becoming law because even if it passes the house and senate, Newsom will veto it.

At this point, it will either have to become a ballot measure or repealed by the state supreme court.