Cali utilities propose Income Based electricity rates

[tangible1]

if that “is” the accurate gen cost, let it sink in, and one can see why the new proposals have a seemingly high access fee and 30%+ less kWh cost.

Also makes the case for those who say Nem less than 3 was unfairly profiting home Solar users, and by extension, home Solar installers.

check page 15 of the CA PUC document linked. it's the 2022 report for FY2021 so it's not exactly current, but close enough.

interestingly, costs have been declining for 3 of the 4 electric utilities in CA. SDG&E is the outlier.
you can dive as deep as you like into this, and it's not simple to carve out costs since so many are burdened with additional regulatory, distribution, etc costs.

But the generation costs are separated out in Figure 1.2 and Table 1.9, and do show 6-8 cents average generation cost per kWh in CA.
that's the max cost that the utilities should be paying for solar buy-backs. all the other burdens are similar or the same.
any amount higher amounts to an un-taxed subsidy.

https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/energy-division/reports/reports-on-utility-costs/2021-ab-67-report.pdf

 

[whisperingshad]

I disagree with what California is going to do but I do understand it. People who have Solar and Battery backup are usually in a higher income bracket. They get less power from the grid when they can generate Solar and pay lower rates. Meanwhile lower income folks pay more for electricity do to the fact that they can't afford Solar to offset their electric bill.

they get 30% of their bill with CARES. While the middle income people, or people like myself that don't own a house, can't get solar or CARES.

 

[tivoboy]

they get 30% of their bill with CARES. While the middle income people, or people like myself that don't own a house, can't get solar or CARES.

The new proposal will cut the variable kW rate by ~33% for all rate payers, I wonder if CARES will still get a further 30% reduction from that part of the billing?

 

[whisperingshad]

The new proposal will cut the variable kW rate by ~33% for all rate payers, I wonder if CARES will still get a further 30% reduction from that part of the billing?

Who knows, would be interesting though...Paying like 40 cents a kW sucks.....Some local cities pay 11 cents

 

[tivoboy]

Who knows, would be interesting though...Paying like 40 cents a kW sucks.....Some local cities pay 11 cents

Well, the .40$/kW is the fully loaded rate, and a locality (or even to some extent industrial user) is probably not paying that and is buying wholesale and also being willing to pay more excessive rates when demand spikes. as noted above, our production costs are closer to .15/kW so a non residential payer can probably get much closer to that. SOME reports have indicated that Tesla pays .20 ish overall, plus some multiple for peak demand during various times of year.

 

[whisperingshad]

Well, the .40$/kW is the fully loaded rate, and a locality (or even to some extent industrial user) is probably not paying that and is buying wholesale and also being willing to pay more excessive rates when demand spikes. as noted above, our production costs are closer to .15/kW so a non residential payer can probably get much closer to that. SOME reports have indicated that Tesla pays .20 ish overall, plus some multiple for peak demand during various times of year.

Its my base rate, my friend lives in Riverside and pay 11c for his base rate....SCE vs Riverside power

 

[tivoboy]

Its my base rate, my friend lives in Riverside and pay 11c for his base rate....SCE vs Riverside power

There are many places around CA where rates are 10-15 cents.. Riverside county has several of them.

CA average is about ~17 cents, not sure if that is avg per rate PAYER or per kW used
Commercial rates are about 20% lower and Industrial rates are about 35% lower.

 

[Konicom04]

Im pretty sure state of California, as well as my beloved Cook County, IL needs to be shut down and restarted again.

There's just no coming back from this

 

[DP26]

The new proposal will cut the variable kW rate by ~33% for all rate payers, I wonder if CARES will still get a further 30% reduction from that part of the billing?

I think cares will still have a kWh cost reduction.

 

[sunwarriors]

The new proposal will cut the variable kW rate by ~33% for all rate payers, I wonder if CARES will still get a further 30% reduction from that part of the billing?

My concern has always been charge a massively high monthly rate for all, lower rates by 33% now. Continue to raise the monthly fee higher and higher each year and in 3 years as well, we will see the variable rate right back up to the old rates even with the high monthly fees.

I still feel there really is no solution until the IOUs are taken over and made non-profit or better yet, get more local with power so I don't have to deal with folks in Sacramento or selfishly, folks in rural areas where we have to run millions of transmission lines for 10 houses, etc...They can go off grid or something and PG&E can stop burning those cities to the ground due to their poor maintenance.

 

[ucmndd]

But the generation costs are separated out in Figure 1.2 and Table 1.9, and do show 6-8 cents average generation cost per kWh in CA.
that's the max cost that the utilities should be paying for solar buy-backs.

This only makes sense if we pretend the cost to generate electricity has nothing to do whatsoever with its value at any given time on the market.

Subsidies for clean energy make perfect sense from a public policy perspective. This is an important role of government - incentivizing behaviors that benefit the common good. An unregulated free market would have us all burning our trash to power and heat our homes because that’s the cheapest option.

 

[tangible1]

This only makes sense if we pretend the cost to generate electricity has nothing to do whatsoever with its value at any given time on the market.

Subsidies for clean energy make perfect sense from a public policy perspective. This is an important role of government - incentivizing behaviors that benefit the common good. An unregulated free market would have us all burning our trash to power and heat our homes because that’s the cheapest option.

subsidies for clean power CAN make sense, but not as structured in CA.
subsidies are paid for by the ratepayers overall.
the costs for those able to take advantage are paid for by higher rates for other, less fortunate ratepayers!

the costs of solar buy-backs are added into the overall cost basis, from which the rates are then calculated.

 

[whisperingshad]

There are many places around CA where rates are 10-15 cents.. Riverside county has several of them.

CA average is about ~17 cents, not sure if that is avg per rate PAYER or per kW used
Commercial rates are about 20% lower and Industrial rates are about 35% lower.

Just not riverside, outside of riverside electric...Perris, moval, jurupa valley

The average residential electricity rate in Riverside County, CA is 30 ¢/kWh, which is 1% lower than the average electricity rate in California of 30.17 ¢/kWh. The average residential electricity rate in Riverside County, CA is 71% higher than the national average rate of 17 ¢/kWh.

 

[whydontwe]

My concern has always been charge a massively high monthly rate for all, lower rates by 33% now. Continue to raise the monthly fee higher and higher each year and in 3 years as well, we will see the variable rate right back up to the old rates even with the high monthly fees.

I still feel there really is no solution until the IOUs are taken over and made non-profit or better yet, get more local with power so I don't have to deal with folks in Sacramento or selfishly, folks in rural areas where we have to run millions of transmission lines for 10 houses, etc...They can go off grid or something and PG&E can stop burning those cities to the ground due to their poor maintenance.

I disagree with the municipal model. Yes, it's a public good, but having a pure-play government entity run the electric utility seems problematic. I think the CPUC should move toward more of a performance-based regulatory environment.

 

[sunwarriors]

I disagree with the municipal model. Yes, it's a public good, but having a pure-play government entity run the electric utility seems problematic. I think the CPUC should move toward more of a performance-based regulatory environment.

The CPUC is in the pocket of the utilities already.


This is why I state that my idea is more local area based. Even within sub developments, etc...Only support people local to a specific area. I'm not against being connected to other grids to not be like Texas, but no way someone in Sacramento cares about anything that happens in LA or San Diego.

All government entities have issues, sure, but my belief is we're already well past the point that the IOUs can really do anything right anymore and it's simply not possible to have a for profit entity do the right thing, for the environment nor for the customers. It's a pure conflict of interest of profits (shareholders) vs. conservation, lower usage, etc. It simply can't and will never work. Never.

 

[whydontwe]

The CPUC is in the pocket of the utilities already.


This is why I state that my idea is more local area based. Even within sub developments, etc...Only support people local to a specific area. I'm not against being connected to other grids to not be like Texas, but no way someone in Sacramento cares about anything that happens in LA or San Diego.

All government entities have issues, sure, but my belief is we're already well past the point that the IOUs can really do anything right anymore and it's simply not possible to have a for profit entity do the right thing, for the environment nor for the customers. It's a pure conflict of interest of profits (shareholders) vs. conservation, lower usage, etc. It simply can't and will never work. Never.

You mean like a co-op? Utility cooperative - Wikipedia

 

[tangible1]

The CPUC is in the pocket of the utilities already.


This is why I state that my idea is more local area based. Even within sub developments, etc...Only support people local to a specific area. I'm not against being connected to other grids to not be like Texas, but no way someone in Sacramento cares about anything that happens in LA or San Diego.

All government entities have issues, sure, but my belief is we're already well past the point that the IOUs can really do anything right anymore and it's simply not possible to have a for profit entity do the right thing, for the environment nor for the customers. It's a pure conflict of interest of profits (shareholders) vs. conservation, lower usage, etc. It simply can't and will never work. Never.

the CPUC is in the pockets of the Legislature, not the utilities - by a long shot.
the utilities were forced into supporting 'green initiatives', solar buy-backs, etc.
that led directly to further deferred maintenance, and the subsequent fire disasters and more.

no one has clean hands in the whole scenario but 'legislative initiatives' put the utilities between a rock (financial markets) and a hard place (legislature).
the outcome was inevitable.

 

[Big Dog]

deleted

 

[Big Dog]

the CPUC is in the pockets of the Legislature, not the utilities - by a long shot.
the utilities were forced into supporting 'green initiatives', solar buy-backs, etc.
that led directly to further deferred maintenance, and the subsequent fire disasters and more.

no one has clean hands in the whole scenario but 'legislative initiatives' put the utilities between a rock (financial markets) and a hard place (legislature).
the outcome was inevitable.

Bingo. I just don't understand all this hate for the utilities* when they are essentially managed by the Politicians and do their bidding.

The Governor makes all of the appointments to the PUC and the Legislature approves this appointments. If the members of PUC were not doing the bidding of the Pols, those members would get replaced. If the our elected representatives in the Legislature did not agree with this new law, they would not have passed it. Or, look at this another way, if you want the Utils to change their M.O., elect different representatives.

Well actually, I do as the Pols are really good at deflecting blame to the utilities as the Bogeymen, and the press buys it hook, line and sinker.

 

[whisperingshad]

Bingo. I just don't understand all this hate for the utilities* when they are essentially managed by the Politicians and do their bidding.

The Governor makes all of the appointments to the PUC and the Legislature approves this appointments. If the members of PUC were not doing the bidding of the Pols, those members would get replaced. If the our elected representatives in the Legislature did not agree with this new law, they would not have passed it. Or, look at this another way, if you want the Utils to change their M.O., elect different representatives.

Well actually, I do as the Pols are really good at deflecting blame to the utilities as the Bogeymen, and the press buys it hook, line and sinker.

Time for a new type of Governor then