6 ms·
PG&E claims no connection between rate increases and $2.2B jump in earnings
- ethbr1 3y agoI mean, technically they're right. There's no connection between a rate increase on Jan 1 2024 and reported earnings for 2023. Bad title. But it will be curious to see how 2024 goes financially for them.
- bushbaba 3y agoRate increase means more profit. As PGE is granted a preset profit margin of revenues.
- ethbr1 3y agoFor the current year. Not last year.
- darth_avocado 3y agoPG&E has had rate increases in 2022 and 2023. There is no way they can claim no relationship between rate increases and profitability. If anything, 2023 profits should then mean 2024 rate increases which were made on the claims of company losing money were unnecessary.
- oefrha 3y agoSure, > But the notion that anything coming out of our earnings report is in direct result of the rate increase, is completely false. emphasis on the rate increase. But of course there was a rate hike in 2023 as well: The average PG&E bill may soon be going up a shocking $35 a month - Feb 3, 2023 https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/pge-utility-bill-increases-17747096.php https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/pge-utility-bill-increas...
- EchoChamberMan 3y agoUnlimited year over year growth is cancer, and it's killing most of us. A lot of other companies are raking in records profits as well. [Edit] Much of these profits have just as much justification as pg&e - "I want more." [Edi] Wow, they have the audacity to say the profits are "primarily driven by an increase in customer capital investment," as if customers chose to give their money away. https://www.pgecorp.com/news/news-details.d78413bf-71e9-4a77-be2c-d88f44203572.html https://www.pgecorp.com/news/news-details.d78413bf-71e9-4a77...
- aiauthoritydev2 3y agoProfit is not a problem. The problem is PG&E is pretty much a monopoly enabled by Californian state.
- EchoChamberMan 3y agoProfit at any cost is absolutely a problem.
- anonuser123456 3y agoProfit in free markets drives competitors to come in and eat those profits. The problem we have right now is that BigCos use government to erect barriers to entry.
- meaydinli 3y agoThere are plenty of monopolies, duopolies, etc in the "free" market that have nothing to do with governments. Example: How broadband companies share the map and don't intrude into each other's "territories".
- TulliusCicero 3y agoThey're literally granted monopolies by local governments.
- jkelleyrtp 3y agoPGE charges me 50c/kwh just to deliver my power. I still spend an additional 12c/kwh for it to be generated. My bill last two months were $200 each for a 1 bed in SF. Insane.
- asdff 3y agoIf you want cheap power you need a public provider. LADWP charges 16-21c/kwh depending on your usage.
- meaydinli 3y agoFor the last few months, we have done our best to reduce both our electric and gas usages. Unfortunately, regardless of however much we reduce, each bill came higher than the one before.
- obmelvin 3y agoThis has roughly been my experience in San Diego with SDG&E as well. We are renting with mostly older appliances, including an electric water heater that with an energy rating sticker suggesting a cost of nearly $100 month - the numbers look much better on it because they use 12c kWh lol. We do nearly all vacuuming, washer, dryer and dishwasher on the weekends when it's cheapest. We don't use an AC or heater. But, we do cook nearly every night on an ancient electric stove and I do work from home with 1 or 2 32" monitors. It seems impossible to pay much less than $150 month.
- ethbr1 3y agoThat's insane. Are they sweeping all the state/city mandates into the delivery charge? Example from the SE: base charge of $35 (static, I believe) + 10.6c/kwh.
- eszed 3y ago> Are they sweeping all the state/city mandates into the delivery charge? Nope, not on my bill.
- 3y ago
- nelox 3y agoSo they should be able to drop prices without it affecting earnings
- systemvoltage 3y ago[flagged]
- MattGaiser 3y agoEnergy efficiency is about making it practically abundant. With LEDs, energy is no longer a major limit on light for example.
- systemvoltage 3y agoLED light bulbs suck for the most part. After all these years, we still don't have the following: - 3000K-1800K dimming characteristics like halogen - 100 CRI - Truly Flicker-free LED lights have only 2 things going for it: Long life and low energy usage. We can render the latter irrelevant if we make energy abundant and cheap. You can't even buy Halogen in California, hope someone sues the shit out of them.
- rdedev 3y agoThe use less energy comes from the fact that most energy production comes from fossil fuels and that messes up the environment/climate. If everythig is generated using solar you won't be hearing progressive saying use less energy
- systemvoltage 3y agoI feel like it has become a degrowth cult, may be not on HN but your random Karen in Oakland wants to cut down on energy usage all-together, not realizing that China is polluting on a monumental scale without remorse. Climate cult makes no sense in America: They lobbied their tails off in 70's and 80's against nuclear power, robbed America's future from their kids. America could have been way cleaner if we stop listening to woke idiots from California about energy policy.
- Kapura 3y ago"Increased profits have nothing to do with increased rates" is like saying "the wetness on your leg has nothing to do with me taking a leak on it." I don't know if they think people are stupid, or if they just have a monopoly of they're little slice of the country so there's nothing anybody can do.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nielsbot 3y agoWhat would happen if the state took ownership of distribution and ran it at $0 profit? Customers could choose any generation service they like. Any downsides?
- bmitc 3y agoCertain political parties hate anything not making a profit, even government services, so the major downside that I see is getting politicians to agree to it. For what it's worth, I agree with you and feel many things should be turned into non-profit government services.
- parineum 3y ago> Certain political parties hate anything not making a profit Since we're talking about the one party state of California, I assume you're talking about Democrats.
- earthwalker99 3y agoThat's literally communism.
- vineyardmike 3y agoYes. It works in much of the world. Plenty of places have have government run the power companies.... like, for example, the capital city of California, or the largest city in California (LA). And SF, another major city, is looking into having a municipal power company as well. I grew up in a small town on the east coast, and we had a municipal electricity company. Service was better and cheaper. And we got discounts on next month's electricity if the company accidentally ran a profit the prior month. Americans have such a visceral reaction to their own perception of communism they forget that it can work, even in America.
- Paul-Craft 3y agoState-run services are not communism. Don't be obtuse.
- 3y ago
- sevg 3y agoFor people outside USA/California, PG&E serves gas and electricity to two thirds of California. They're featured in the film Erin Brockovitch for knowingly dumping 1400 million litres of hexavalent chromium contaminated water in the 50s and not informing the water board until the 80s, resulting in countless cancer deaths in Hinkley, California. Their equipment has led to many wildfires (eg, approximately 40 of the 315 wildfires in PG&E's service area in 2017 and 2018 were allegedly caused by PG&E equipment). They've been guilty multiple times of criminal negligence, including for gas explosions (see comments below from epistasis and toomuchtodo). They've had controversies surrounding tax dodging, deforestation, dirty tactics to maintain monopoly, collusion with regulatory agencies, and rates that are among the highest in the US (eg, electricity rates in 2021 were 80% above the national average). Overall, a real treasure of a utility company. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric_Company#Disasters https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric_Com... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric_Company#Controversies https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric_Com...
- toomuchtodo 3y agoAlso of note is their handling of their fossil gas infrastructure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-pge-safety-investigation-20181214-story.html https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-pge-safety-investigat...
- epistasis 3y agoOne of the many times they have killed: eight people in San Bruno in 2010 due to a gas pipeline explosion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion > On January 13, 2012, an independent audit from the State of California issued a report stating that PG&E had illegally diverted over $100 million from a fund used for safety operations, and instead used it for executive compensation and bonuses. This while charging unbelievably high rates for some of the worst reliability rates I have ever seen anywhere in the US.
- 3y ago
- refurb 3y agoDownload the General Rate Case (GRC)…all 1000+ pages, on the CPUC website and see how much control PG&E has over its operations and rates. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-energy/electric-rates/general-rate-case/pacific-gas-and-electric-grc-proceedings https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-ene... (Hint: it’s near zero) PG&E can’t fill their toilet paper dispensers in their bathrooms without CPUC’s ok. Ok, a slight exaggeration, but things like replacing a chain link fence on a substation that costs $200k gets rejected. That’s how detailed CPUC gets into PG&E’s operation and finances. Keep in mind it took 3 years for PG&E and CPUC to finalize these rates. They started in 2020. You’re probably asking, who the hell is CPUC? And who nominates those on the CPUC board? Governor Newsom. He nominates them directly. My theory is keeping PG&E private provides a convenient whipping boy for the state politicians. If it was made public then all those problems would be Newsom’s (political) problems? Right now? Newsom gets votes for his “tough talk” about PG&E which is hilarious to me. Newsom! PG&E? That’s you buddy!
- renewiltord 3y agoEveryone on Reddit keeps posting outrageous bills. Meanwhile we've never broken $200 in a 2000 sq ft San Francisco apartment. I just set the thermostat for 72 F and forget about it. Sometimes we then turn on the air conditioner to cool things down since the apartment is multilevel and we sleep on the top floor. So, COULD_NOT_REPRODUCE
- jkelleyrtp 3y agoThe delivery fee is different for every building in the city. I’ve been receiving $200+ bills and been asking around to friends and their delivery fee per kWh is less than mine, for whatever reason. Sounds like you got lucky.
- renewiltord 3y agoThat may well be true. I suppose then we should simply post our usage. Our highest bill (at $199.88) had 327 kWh total of energy consumption and 31 "therms" (apparently about 3.27 GJ) of gas energy. I would obviously prefer they measure gas by volume or mass of it provided but overall that doesn't seem outrageous.
- asdff 3y agoIf you want to actually stick it to the PGE investors, consider opening a short position during wildfire season.
- doron2402 3y agoI'm constantly amazed by the fact that in California, one of the world's most expensive places to live, with a GDP rivaling that of some countries, a company like PG&E is responsible for providing electricity and gas. Surely, we can expect a higher level of service?
- alxmng 3y agoPG&E has also done everything they can to stop San Francisco from providing its own power. But hopefully that's finally coming to an end: San Francisco is taking the biggest steps in history toward creating a full public-power system. In filings with the California Public Utilities Commission, the city has established that PG&E’s local property is worth about $2.3 billion—and if the commission agrees, the city can move to seize those assets under the power of eminent domain. https://48hills.org/2024/03/after-111-years-sf-is-finally-moving-to-oust-pge-and-create-a-public-power-system/ https://48hills.org/2024/03/after-111-years-sf-is-finally-mo...
- MichaelZuo 3y agoSeems like an absurdly low number, $2.3 billion couldn't even recreate a fifth of the current electrical grid in SF.
- theogravity 3y agoI love how at the bottom of the article it says, "In the meantime, if you do need help paying your PG&E bill, there is help available here." Click it and it goes to a 404.
- 93po 3y agoI wish it was just an image of a middle finger.
- ghouse 3y agoPG&E is an investor-owned regulated monopoly. Other utilities in California are publicly owned (either government, or non-profit. For example, LADWP, SMUD, Palo Alto, Turlock and many, many more). Those publicly owned utilities have much lower rates. PG&E has a "revenue requirement" which is the amount it needs to bring in to cover operating, energy procurement, construction, and profit. At the most simplistic level, rates ($/kWh) are set by dividing the revenue requirement by the anticipated quantity of electricity sold. The amount of profit it is allowed to make it determined primarily by how much it has invested to safely and reliably deliver electricity. Some of that is regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Something like a 9% return on equity for investment. This creates a misalignment of incentives: PG&E would rather spend CapEx than OpEx. This is the market failure (of the natural monopoly) that the regulator is supposed to address. However, PG&E's lack of maintainence on a metal hook (over > 80 years) which eventually failed caused the Camp Fire. Instead of replacing all of the hooks (a relatively inexpensive OpEx), PG&E proposed, and the CPUC blessed, an incredibly expensive effort to underground transmission lines. [0] This is a windfall for PG&E's investors and organized labor in California. But a huge headwind to the economy of California, and California's efforts to electrify. As others have noted, PG&E's rates are now so expensive that driving an EV doesn't save materially (or at all) over gasoline (even with California's relatively high gasoline prices). [0] https://www.wsj.com/us-news/climate-environment/pg-e-wins-approval-to-bury-more-than-1-200-miles-of-power-lines-3ab460d4 https://www.wsj.com/us-news/climate-environment/pg-e-wins-ap...
- bcrl 3y agoHere in Ontario we are similarly bent over the barrel by Hydro One. The key to operating a regulated monopoly is to inflate your expenses so that the regulator has no choice but to approve the increase the rate you charge. Hydro One accomplishes this by sending out 6 people to do a job that only requires 2 or 3. Works great -- our delivery rates have never been higher!