So PG&E can raise their rates to anything they want to pay for maintenence along transmission lines? Or does the state get a say in what they raise rates to?
If it’s like Utah, PG&E would need to justify any rate increase, AND it would have to be voted on by the rate regulatory authority (in utah public service commission). If they don’t get the rate increase OR they hit other state regulatory roadblocks in clearing and maintaining the transmission line corridors, then it would not be entirely PG&E’s fault. From what I read this summer it’s a combination of all three. Rates, regulations on how they are allowed to maintain corridors, and them not following through on some maintenance.
Yep like I said this is ALL PG&E’s fault. You made the faulty assumption that they asked for a rate increase to address the issue but were turned down. The only problem is that none of that happened. They didnt petition it nor were they turned down.
It is entirely the fault of the utility for neglecting their infrastructure
I love this post! Not being grammar police cause I hate that crap but this reminded me of one of my favorite quotes from Big Bang:
Sheldon Cooper:
With the understanding that nothing changes, whatsoever. Physical or otherwise. I would not object to us no longer characterizing you as not my girlfriend.
Amy Farrah Fowler:
Interesting. Now, try it without the quadruple negative.
They don’t need to have it struck down. They can put out feelers to PSC. If PSC says that rate hike doesn’t have a chance in hell, then they don’t bring it before the commission.
Are you on the PG&E board and know if that happened? Do you know the budget of PG&E? Would there budget over the years allow for the type of maintenence that appears to have been required? If they don’t have the budget, they need to what?
If they didnt budget for it then they are operating irresponsibly and wholly responsible for any damages. Their infrastructure burning up California is not a new thing
Want to know why they didnt? Because in the past they’ve been allowed to pass the cost of damages on to ratepayers. However a judge finally decided that doing so is no different than a slum lord charging his tenants because the electrical he refused to gixed burned the building down
Again, they are not completely in control of their budget and what they can spend. They can’t just one day say “oh we gotta raise rates to take care of this”. The company knows it has to go to the rate commission, and they have to convince the rate commission it’s justifiable.
There was no sudden " Oh we got to do this". Their lines have been burning down California for decades. No matter how you slice it not addressing that is negligent. They are responsible for the damage their lines do, nobody else. It doesnt matter if they couldn’t get ratepayers to foot the bill as that in no way absolves them of that responsibility
Again, if they can’t get a rate increase where does the money come from? Loans? Still have to pay it back. Bonds? Same thing still have to pay it back.
So I ask again. If rate payers don’t pay an increased rate, where does the money come from to do the maintenence?
Utah doesn’t seem to have fired caused by transmission lines.
looks like they are limited in the profit the company can make. Why are you against proffit for a company?
Ooooh wait looky here.
Maybe, just maybe, you could tolerate it if the state bars PG&E from getting their usual 10.5 percent guaranteed profit from the $2 billion plus rate increase. After all a good share of the work that will be done to make the system safer so we can enjoy the soft side of PG&E was supposed to have been done previously under previous rate hikes.
Not only is PG&E going to pocket $200 million more in profit over the next two years to do work that if it had been done in a responsible and timely manner would likely have meant 85 less people being cremated, but the “new” PG&E is pushing for more.
PG&E has received a 2 BILLION dollar rate increase (story say’s it’s a 12% rate increase for their customers).
Oh wait, they are LIMITED to 10% proffit
They are arguing the state should guarantee them a 16 percent return regardless if they use the lives and homes of ratepayers to stoke profit margins beyond the currently guaranteed 10.5 percent return by cutting corners and not doing work as they promised in previous CPUC rate cases.
Asking for a 16% proffit. – seriously doubt that will happen for them.
Regardless, they PG&E is limited in what they can make from their customers. This shows they just asked for and received a 12% increase in rates.
