Comment by joe_the_user | Hacker News Reader

Comment by joe_the_user | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

first, the size and geography of the state make the fixed costs associated with the maintenance of its grid higher than in most other states

More specifically, PGE raises rates to pay for line maintenance but instead steals the money[1], goes into bankruptcy, raises rates again to pay for line maintenance and will likely simply steal the money despite all this.

Even more specifically, after bankruptcy, PG&E has dealt with possible line problems by cutting down a bunch of (historic) trees in my town, Nevada City, They're cutting (a few) trees around their lines as symbolic bandaid, as opposed effective, sustainable methods like installing the equivalent of GFI circuits or putting lines underground (note, Nevada City had actually previous paid to put ours lines underground, but "due to bankruptcy" PGE couldn't do that). And so when these new efforts fail, we'll have another increase in rates to "finally pay for it". And the fire situation need to be barely mentioned - poor forestry or global warming? Of course it's both and of course PG&E bears some responsibility for both.

Judge: PG&E Paid Out Stock Dividends Instead of Trimming Trees

[1] https://www.kqed.org/news/11737336/judge-pge-paid-out-stock-...

CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) sets what profits PG&E makes. Any lack of money spent on maintenance and wildfire prevention necessarily goes into ratepayers pockets in the form of lower electricity rates, and the Office of Ratepayer Avocates in CPUC ensures this remains the case. PG&E is extremely regulated - anything characterized by "stealing the money" or "paying out dividends instead of doing maintenance" is elected and/or appointed officials scapegoating PG&E for complying with their regulatory decisions.

PG&E is a public company listed on the NYSE. It’s absurd to claim that any money they save results in lower prices. They are free to return saved money to shareholders as a dividend, and indeed they have done so in lieu of necessary maintenance. Meanwhile their prices just go up and up.

The CPUC absolutely does not control what profit PG&E makes but they do have to approve any rate increases, which due to regulatory capture, they naturally do. The brokenness of this system is as obvious as the brokenness of its outcomes.

Classic case of regulatory capture: https://theintercept.com/2019/11/04/pge-bailout-bankruptcy-l...

Sounds like it should be nationalized imo

I'm all for that.

I don't know how public management could do a worse job than PG&E.

Off topic, but I would like to see California get tough on all Insurance companies though. We have a full time Insurace Commissioner.

Like basically, "Don't get cute on rates. If you don't stop getting cute, we will take away some of your cake--like go back to requiring car insurance, but not demanding it at DMV. Stop colluding--even though you deny it. Stop sending millions to our politicians." (Sacramento is very much influenced by Insurance industry Lobbiests. I don't have a citation at hand though.)

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing all insurance sold in CA sold by a public nonprofit entity. I believe CA is big enough, and wealthy enough, to self insure its citizens.

"I don't know how public management could do a worse job than PG&E."

Don't tempt fate.

> Sounds like it should be nationalized imo

There was a major effort by a coalition of local governments in the PGE service area along with community orgs and others to have a public takeover in the most recent bankruptcy rather than another private transition to continue thr cycle of bad behavior, massive liability escaped by bankruptcy, and further bad behavior which is PG&E’s history, as well as bids by individual public entities for parts of PG&E’s operations. Some of the latter mat have succeeded but the former failed, and so the cycle will continue.

Already basically has been, CPUC sets PG&E's rates, profits, and infrastructure investment.

There's a middle ground. https://www.smud.org/ is a good example of a well-run public utility in California.

I think you mean state-run, right? Nationalized would mean managed by Congress, which is unlikely to be an improvement.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com