3 ms·
The jump in PG&E prices over the past 10 years is mostly to cover the cost of wildfire mitigation. LA, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, and the Imperial Valley have thei
by wahern 1y ago
The jump in PG&E prices over the past 10 years is mostly to cover the cost of wildfire mitigation. LA, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, and the Imperial Valley have their own local utilities that charge customers 1/2 to 1/4 of what PG&E charges.[1] But PG&E covers the entire northern half of the state. Bay Area PG&E customers are subsidizing all those small communities nestled in the forests. Southern California Edison and San Diego have a mix of urban and forested rural closer to PG&E, with significant wildfire mitigation costs of their own, and their rates reflect that--2/3 to 3/4 of PG&E prices).
Despite approving the cost increases, state regulators are now complaining that PG&E is spending too much on wildfire mitigation. For example, they're telling PG&E to shift from burying transmission lines to using covered conduction (i.e. plastic shielding around overhead transmission lines). But PG&E is pushing back because they're on the hook for the wildfire civil claims and argue the less costly mitigations are too risky.
[1] See https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/196kjtu/pge_rates_vs_other_ca_utilities/ https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/196kjtu/pge_rates_...
- AlotOfReading 1y agoAll of that also applies to pacificorp, which covers the Jefferson area of California. I'm actually double counting a bit in PG&E's favor as a result.
- wahern 1y agoThe wildfire hazards aren't equivalent, nor the political pressures regarding those hazards. But it seems Pacific Power isn't too far behind: https://oregoncub.org/news/blog/pacific-power-asks-for-21.6-rate-increase-for-2025/2979/ https://oregoncub.org/news/blog/pacific-power-asks-for-21.6-...