PUC near decision on alternate energy use
Commission weighing the cost to consumers who wish to move away from traditional providers
How people pick electricity providers — and whether consumers will be forced to pay an unfair share of the costs for a new era of choice in power companies — is at the heart of a key state panel’s decision that’s due as soon as this week.
The state Public Utilities Commission is wrestling with creating a fair marketplace for people who choose to leave utility behemoths such as PG&E to obtain power from alternative electricity providers, as well as for those customers who decide, or are forced to, remain with the legacy power companies.
The decision before the board Thursday will shape the monthly bill costs for customers who switch to new power providers, also known as community choice aggregators, as well as for those who remain with a major utility such as PG&E. PG&E has been pressing for solutions that some skeptics believe will impose too great a financial fee on those who leave the legacy power monopolies.
“One of the major concerns is what does this mean for monthly utility bills,” PUC Commissioner Carla Peterman said during an interview with this news organization. “We want to be able to manage bill shock. We are instituting annual caps for rate increases” connected with exits from major power providers.
As the decision draws near, the mayors of the Bay Area’s three largest cities, San Jose, San Francisco and Oakland, have asked the commission
“One of the major concerns is what does this mean for monthly utility bills.” — Carla Peterman, PUC commissioner
to delay its decision and launch a fresh review of the issue.
“The California Public Utilities Commission is scheduled to take action on an issue that could significantly disrupt the state’s clean energy programs and increase energy fees for utility customers,” San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo, San Francisco Mayor London Breed and Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said in a joint release.
The city leaders want to ensure that the decision doesn’t harm their efforts to create and nurture new power agencies organized by the municipalities.
“Our cities are working to fight climate change by developing clean power programs that are affordable to customers,” mayors Liccardo, Breed and Schaaf said.
San Francisco-based PG&E argues that customers who remain with the utility giants could end up paying more, while those who opt to be served by a local power agency, or community choice aggregator, receive other benefits.
“PG&E wants to ensure that all customers are treated equally and do not pay for other customers,” company spokeswoman Lynsey Paulo said.
In 2018, about 39 percent of PG&E customers are expected to leave the company and during 2019, the total departures are expected to amount to 54 percent of PG&E’s customer base, according to estimates provided Wednesday by the PUC.
“PG&E actually filed a rate reduction for its customers in June, but is now suggesting at the same time that the millions of customers that will be served by community choice energy programs should pay for PG&E’s allegedly higher costs,” Mayor Liccardo said Wednesday in an interview. “Both of these can’t be true. PG&E needs to pick which truth it’s going to tell us.”
PG&E bills have rocketed 20 percent higher in recent years. At the end of 2015, average monthly residential bills for PG&E’s gas and electric service combined were $137.66, but by the end of 2017 they had zoomed to $165.10 a month.
“We have to be sure that when customers leave, they don’t see an increase in their bills,” Peterman said.
San Francisco has launched CleanPowerSF, which has enrolled more than 108,000 customers in renewable energy programs, with another 360,000 set to be enrolled during 2019. East Bay Community Energy, which includes Oakland, is set to enroll 550,000 customers in 2019. San Jose Clean Energy has just launched and will offer 100 percent renewable energy options to all residents and businesses starting next spring.
“Customers throughout the Bay Area understand that they can get cheaper and cleaner energy from community choice programs,” Mayor Liccardo said. “Utility companies want to stick a community’s ratepayers with a bill that should be paid by the company’s shareholders.”