3 ms·

What public utilities in California are doing such a good job that you feel that kind of drastic action would be justified?

by tomcam 3y ago

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
solardev 3y ago
Are there any right now? PG&E has done a pretty poor job, burned down half the state and then went bankrupt. Partially despite/because of heavy regulations. Why not nationalize them altogether and remove the profit seeking middlemen and just let the state run it?
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Are there any right now? Yes, several, e.g., SMUD in Sacramento (PG&E spent a boatload lobbying against SMUD expansion to some of its territories a while back.)
  - solardev 3y ago
    How are they?
    - LexGray 3y ago
      From reporting I have seen Sacramento SMUD is generally 25% cheaper than PG&E with faster outage response and more green initiatives. Supposedly carbon neutral. Potentially 35% of power generated from natural gas which replaced decommissioned nuclear. Generally considered superior across the board.
- lazide 3y ago
  The profit seeking middlemen already extracted the profit. What’s happening now is massive expenditures to get the old infrastructure with shitty/faked documentation less shitty. Nationalizing them now would just ‘socialize the losses’ as the state would be on the hook for all the crap.
- anonuser123456 3y ago
  >Why not nationalize them altogether and remove the profit seeking middlemen and just let the state run it? Because profit maximizing organizations are generally cheaper for consumers and provide better services than state run enterprises. State run entities are beholden to political rules, not economic ones.
  - solardev 3y ago
    Well, in California, they're kinda in the worst of both worlds right now: not state-run but heavily state-regulated, while still trying to make a profit. It's not really working out. They have the burden of state rules without full state support, and can't utilize normal economic rules because of the state limitations. It's just this weird, uncomfortable no-man's land. Between the wildfires and renewables, their rates went up nearly 2x in the last few years and they still went bankrupt. I think some might argue for full privatization, but does that ever work out with a natural monopoly (the transmission portions at least, not so much with generation)? It's like if Comcast provided electricity. I don't think I'm far left enough to want to nationalize everything as a matter of course -- the state bureaucracy, as you imply, isn't great at staying nimble -- but something as mundane and essential as basic infra? Sure, why not. From an equitable services standpoint, right now they're basically charging everyone (via rates) to pay for the actions for a few (solar homeowners), while shrugging off the wildfire situation with no real accountability. As a state enterprise they'd have to have more transparency and accountability (unless they're the Pentagon), and would be subsidized by the existing taxation structures that are already progressive. Right now, the skyrocketing electricity costs in the state are pretty terrifying to behold (I don't even live there), especially if they want to move everyone to EVs. It's just a mess...

What public utilities in California are doing such a good job that you feel that kind of drastic action would be justified?

by tomcam 3y ago

What public utilities in California are doing such a good job that you feel that kind of drastic action would be justified?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

solardev 3y ago

Are there any right now? PG&E has done a pretty poor job, burned down half the state and then went bankrupt. Partially despite/because of heavy regulations. Why not nationalize them altogether and remove the profit seeking middlemen and just let the state run it?

dragonwriter 3y ago
> Are there any right now? Yes, several, e.g., SMUD in Sacramento (PG&E spent a boatload lobbying against SMUD expansion to some of its territories a while back.)
- solardev 3y ago
  How are they?
  - LexGray 3y ago
    From reporting I have seen Sacramento SMUD is generally 25% cheaper than PG&E with faster outage response and more green initiatives. Supposedly carbon neutral. Potentially 35% of power generated from natural gas which replaced decommissioned nuclear. Generally considered superior across the board.
lazide 3y ago
The profit seeking middlemen already extracted the profit. What’s happening now is massive expenditures to get the old infrastructure with shitty/faked documentation less shitty. Nationalizing them now would just ‘socialize the losses’ as the state would be on the hook for all the crap.
anonuser123456 3y ago
>Why not nationalize them altogether and remove the profit seeking middlemen and just let the state run it? Because profit maximizing organizations are generally cheaper for consumers and provide better services than state run enterprises. State run entities are beholden to political rules, not economic ones.
- solardev 3y ago
  Well, in California, they're kinda in the worst of both worlds right now: not state-run but heavily state-regulated, while still trying to make a profit. It's not really working out. They have the burden of state rules without full state support, and can't utilize normal economic rules because of the state limitations. It's just this weird, uncomfortable no-man's land. Between the wildfires and renewables, their rates went up nearly 2x in the last few years and they still went bankrupt. I think some might argue for full privatization, but does that ever work out with a natural monopoly (the transmission portions at least, not so much with generation)? It's like if Comcast provided electricity. I don't think I'm far left enough to want to nationalize everything as a matter of course -- the state bureaucracy, as you imply, isn't great at staying nimble -- but something as mundane and essential as basic infra? Sure, why not. From an equitable services standpoint, right now they're basically charging everyone (via rates) to pay for the actions for a few (solar homeowners), while shrugging off the wildfire situation with no real accountability. As a state enterprise they'd have to have more transparency and accountability (unless they're the Pentagon), and would be subsidized by the existing taxation structures that are already progressive. Right now, the skyrocketing electricity costs in the state are pretty terrifying to behold (I don't even live there), especially if they want to move everyone to EVs. It's just a mess...